Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2018 » February » 07
MOVING THE APPEAL TRIBUNAL FURTHER & FURTHER AWAY FROM THE APPELLANT'S HOME: PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS

MOVING THE APPEAL TRIBUNAL FURTHER & FURTHER AWAY FROM THE APPELLANT’S HOME: PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments, Appeals, Members Content

Earlier this week I paid tribute to Sir Henry Brooke. This included his most recent work dealing with PIPs and ESAs.  He wrote in his blog: “Readers  of these blogs will know I have been telling stories of the injustices…

GOBBETS AND LIMITATION:  ISSUES AT THE DREAMING SPIRES

GOBBETS AND LIMITATION: ISSUES AT THE DREAMING SPIRES

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

There are many fascinating aspects of the judgment in Siddiqui v The Chancellor, Masters & Scholars of the University of Oxford [2018] EWHC 184 (QB). As  is often the case I have chosen to concentrate on one of  the most prosaic…

WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY

WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID II? LAWYERS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: REVIEW YOUR RETAINER CAREFULLY

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Radford & Anor v Frade & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 119 the Court of Appeal upheld the early decisions that lawyers, who worked outside the terms of their retainer under a CFA, could not recover costs from the unsuccessful party….

90% WAS A GENUINE OFFER OF SETTLEMENT: CLAIMANT RECEIVES PART 36 BENEFITS AFTER OFFERING A 10% DISCOUNT

90% WAS A GENUINE OFFER OF SETTLEMENT: CLAIMANT RECEIVES PART 36 BENEFITS AFTER OFFERING A 10% DISCOUNT

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

In   the judgment today in JMX (A child by his Mother and Litigation Friend, FMX) v Norfolk and Norwich Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 185 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett was very robust in his view that an offer of…

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR'S SURVIVAL GUIDE  VI: COULD PROJECT MANAGEMENT HELP?

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VI: COULD PROJECT MANAGEMENT HELP?

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Members Content

This series on proportionality for litigators is a long-running one.  One suggestion is that “Legal project management” could help.  There is a very short entry in Wikipedia as to what “Legal project management” is. LEGAL PROJECT MANAGEMENT I put questions to…

WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREATING AN ACCURATE RECORD OF INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT AT WORK: SPOT - AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT

WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREATING AN ACCURATE RECORD OF INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT AT WORK: SPOT – AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I have written before about the book The Memory Illusion. In essence  lawyers need to be concerned about how easy it is for false memories to be created and how fallible the human memory is. The creation of an inaccurate…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A PRACTICAL AI PRIMER FOR LAWYERS: THE SECOND EDITION OF “ANDREW AND THE MARVELLOUS ANALYTICAL ENGINE”: MAJOR ADDITIONS TO A FAST MOVING AND IMPORTANT AREA
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 7: SECOND ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE A FOREIGN JUDGMENT WAS (AMONG OTHER THINGS) AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
  • LITIGATOR’S LIFELINES 3: WHAT IF YOU HAVE SERVED A SCHEDULE OF COSTS LATE?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “SKELETON ARGUMENTS – DO THEM PROPERLY OR YOU WON’T GET PAID” (NOVEMBER 2014)
  • COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE

Top Posts

FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
YOU CAN'T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN'T ATTEND - BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS ...
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
WRITING LETTERS TO THE JUDGE AFTER A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS CIRCULATED: "THIS IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE CONDUCT OF SOLICITORS CONDUCTING LITIGATION AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET"
COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.