Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • My Account
  • Login
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 » May » 01
ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE’S VIEW SERIES 3: PART 2: MAXIMISING YOUR IMPACT AS AN ADVOCATE: REPUTATION IS ALL

ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE’S VIEW SERIES 3: PART 2: MAXIMISING YOUR IMPACT AS AN ADVOCATE: REPUTATION IS ALL

May 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Members Content

In the second of this series we are going to Australia. More accurately to Queensland to look at the advice given by Fleur Kingham, President of the Land Court of Queensland.  The lecture was given in the QLS Modern Advocate…

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO A CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT FAILED TO GET PERMISSION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO A CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT FAILED TO GET PERMISSION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS

May 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Although the Denton principles are much more settled it is prudent to keep a weather eye on cases where they are considered. His Honour Judge Davis-White QC (sitting as a judge of the Chancery Division in Leeds) applied the Denton principles in a…

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 35.1K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • “LESS IS MORE” WHEN DRAFTING NOTICES OF APPEAL: THE “KITCHEN SINK” APPROACH DOES NOT PERSUADE THE COURT OF APPEAL TO GRANT PERMISSION
  • IF A CLAIMANT ISSUES AND LITIGATES WHEN THEY DO NOT HAVE CAPACITY – ARE THEY LIABLE FOR THE COSTS INCURRED? COURT OF APPEAL SCRUTINISES EXPERT EVIDENCE AND FINDS IT WANTING
  • COST BITES 254: DOES YOUR CLIENT HAVE CAPACITY? AN IMPORTANT POINT WHEN CONSIDERING THE VALIDITY OF THE RETAINER: AN ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE SCCO TODAY
  • COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS “BROUGHT FOR COLLATERAL PURPOSES” DISMISSED: NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE ISSUED AGAINST THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS: WHY THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS STRATEGY
  • ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY PROPERLY WITH AN UNLESS ORDER FOR DETAILS OF FUNDING: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

Top Posts & Pages

  • Login
  • COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS "BROUGHT FOR COLLATERAL PURPOSES" DISMISSED: NOTICE TO SHOW CAUSE ISSUED AGAINST THE CLAIMANT'S SOLICITORS: WHY THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS STRATEGY
  • IF A CLAIMANT ISSUES AND LITIGATES WHEN THEY DO NOT HAVE CAPACITY - ARE THEY LIABLE FOR THE COSTS INCURRED? COURT OF APPEAL SCRUTINISES EXPERT EVIDENCE AND FINDS IT WANTING
  • ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY PROPERLY WITH AN UNLESS ORDER FOR DETAILS OF FUNDING: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
  • COST BITES 254: DOES YOUR CLIENT HAVE CAPACITY? AN IMPORTANT POINT WHEN CONSIDERING THE VALIDITY OF THE RETAINER: AN ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE SCCO TODAY

Archives

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 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 National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2023
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025. 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 © 2025 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...