Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » 2018 » March » Page 3
WITHOUT PREJUDICE COMMUNICATIONS & WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: TAXING MATTERS

WITHOUT PREJUDICE COMMUNICATIONS & WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: TAXING MATTERS

March 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

A post earlier this week looked at the issue of privilege and the third edition of the standard work on the topic.  It is worthwhile looking at the decision in Conegate Ltd v Revenue & Customs (CAPITAL GAINS TAX – purchase…

STRESS, LITIGATION AND LAWYERS: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

STRESS, LITIGATION AND LAWYERS: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

March 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Relief from sanctions

I have blogged on stress and the litigation process several times.  This is because there are close links to the work I do on relief from sanctions. Being involved in a case where there is default inevitably causes stress. Further…

LITIGATORS - MISSED A DEADLINE? DON'T DIG BIGGER HOLES FOR YOURSELF: DIG YOURSELF OUT (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM YOUR FRIENDS)

LITIGATORS – MISSED A DEADLINE? DON’T DIG BIGGER HOLES FOR YOURSELF: DIG YOURSELF OUT (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM YOUR FRIENDS)

March 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Jackson, Relief from sanctions

The decision in Wingate & Anor v The Solicitors Regulation Authority [2018] EWCA Civ 366 may well be Jackson L.J’s last judgment (certainly as a full time judge). It concerned the conduct of solicitors. I want to look at one aspect…

SIR RUPERT JACKSON ON THE DAY OF HIS RETIREMENT: A REVIEW OF SOME JUDGMENTS ON PROCEDURE

SIR RUPERT JACKSON ON THE DAY OF HIS RETIREMENT: A REVIEW OF SOME JUDGMENTS ON PROCEDURE

March 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements, Written advocacy

It is well known that Sir Rupert Jackson retires on the 7th March.  There are several reviews of the work Sir Rupert has done in re-shaping civil procedure.  Here I want to look at a few of his judgments that…

A PRIVILEGE TO READ : THE LAW OF PRIVILEGE 3rd EDITION: COUPLED WITH SOME RECENT EXAMPLES - TO SHOW WHY YOU NEED IT

A PRIVILEGE TO READ : THE LAW OF PRIVILEGE 3rd EDITION: COUPLED WITH SOME RECENT EXAMPLES – TO SHOW WHY YOU NEED IT

March 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Book Review, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure

The Law of Privilege is now in its third edition.  I have been reading through it and planning a review for some time. I came across the decision, on BAILLI today in Fleming v East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust…

“MISSING WITNESSES”- THE INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN: THE USE OF YOUR OPPONENT’S WITNESS STATEMENTS – ITS ALL OR NOTHING

March 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

In Property Alliance Group Ltd v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc [2018] EWCA Civ 355 the Court of Appeal considered, amongst other things, two issues relating to witness evidence.  Firstly in relation to the inferences a court should draw from missing…

COSTS ON APPEAL - TWO ISSUES: COSTS AWARDED WHERE THERE WAS NO SCHEDULE BELOW: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A PARTY HAD MADE AN OFFER TO COMPROMISE AN APPEAL

COSTS ON APPEAL – TWO ISSUES: COSTS AWARDED WHERE THERE WAS NO SCHEDULE BELOW: INDEMNITY COSTS WHEN A PARTY HAD MADE AN OFFER TO COMPROMISE AN APPEAL

March 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Part 36

An earlier post dealt with the substantive decision in Cross-v- Black Bull (Doncaster) Limited* (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2017).   A short supplementary judgment dealt with two issues as to costs. KEY POINTS The fact that a party did not have a…

THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD: HOW DOES ANYONE MISS IT?

THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD: HOW DOES ANYONE MISS IT?

March 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation

This blog has covered numerous cases relating to Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980. It is worthwhile considering what causes a lawyer to miss a basic three year limitation period.  In In Greater Manchester Police v Carroll [2017] EWCA Civ 1992 the…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 3: A JUDGMENT FROM TODAY: CREDIBILITY A CENTRAL PART OF THE CASE

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 3: A JUDGMENT FROM TODAY: CREDIBILITY A CENTRAL PART OF THE CASE

March 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Arbitration,, Civil evidence, Witness statements

This is the third post today about the subject of the assessment of witness credibility. By a curious piece of good planning it comes from a judgment today in  Jiangsu Shagang Group Co Ltd v Loki Owning Company Ltd [2018] EWHC…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 2: ACADEMIC SCRUTINY: PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND WITNESS EVIDENCE

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 2: ACADEMIC SCRUTINY: PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND WITNESS EVIDENCE

March 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

Near the beginning of many judgments after a trial there is a section where the judge gives their view of the reliability and credibility of the witnesses. In about 98% of cases it is not necessary to read further to…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 1: A STRUCTURED APPROACH: DEMEANOUR NOT DETERMINATIVE

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 1: A STRUCTURED APPROACH: DEMEANOUR NOT DETERMINATIVE

March 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

This blog has looked at issues relating to witness credibility on many occasions.  Here we look at a decision by the Upper Tribunal in  KB & AH (credibility-structured approach : Pakistan) [2017] UKUT 491 (IAC). This is of general interest.  Issues…

← Previous 1 2 3

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2022. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 26,333 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER 2: THERE WAS NO MISCONDUCT BY THE CLAIMANTS, HOWEVER THE COSTS OF ARGUING ABOUT CONDUCT WERE NOT ALLOWED
  • COSTS INCURRED PRIOR TO DEFENDANT’S BREACH ARE RECOVERABLE: THEY WERE “INCIDENTAL” TO THE APPLICATION
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: A WORKING EXAMPLE: THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: HOURS, SUPERVISION AND THE USE OF COUNSEL
  • THE REDUCTION OF A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF CONDUCT: RELEVANT CALDERBANK OFFERS CONSIDERED: RECOVERABLE COSTS REDUCED BY 15% AND 60%
  • SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE: A CLAIMANT NEEDS A SPECIFIC STATEMENT THAT SERVICE WILL BE ACCEPTED: APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME REFUSED

Top Posts & Pages

  • SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE: A CLAIMANT NEEDS A SPECIFIC STATEMENT THAT SERVICE WILL BE ACCEPTED: APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME REFUSED
  • THE REDUCTION OF A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT'S COSTS BECAUSE OF CONDUCT: RELEVANT CALDERBANK OFFERS CONSIDERED: RECOVERABLE COSTS REDUCED BY 15% AND 60%
  • THE COSTS JUDGE OVER YOUR SHOULDER: A WORKING EXAMPLE: THE DETAILED ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: HOURS, SUPERVISION AND THE USE OF COUNSEL
  • SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: THERE WAS PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS, HOWEVER THE RESULT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE SAME
  • COSTS INCURRED PRIOR TO DEFENDANT'S BREACH ARE RECOVERABLE: THEY WERE "INCIDENTAL" TO THE APPLICATION

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2022 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin