Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2018 » July » 09
PROVING THINGS 119: WITNESSES & EXPERTS : "IN A CASE OF FAIRLY REMARKABLE REPORTS, THIS WAS THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY"

PROVING THINGS 119: WITNESSES & EXPERTS : “IN A CASE OF FAIRLY REMARKABLE REPORTS, THIS WAS THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY”

July 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

 If you want to see an example of problematic witness statements, and even more problematic expert witnesses, then read the judgment of Mrs Justice Jefford DBE in Castle Trustee Ltd & Ors v Bombay Palace Restaurant Ltd [2018] EWHC 1602 (TCC). …

PROVING THINGS 118: IT SEEMS THAT EVEN THE LORD CHANCELLOR DOESN'T KNOW HOW TO PROVE THINGS: "THAT FINAL SENTENCE WAS BOTH INACCURATE AND MISLEADING"

PROVING THINGS 118: IT SEEMS THAT EVEN THE LORD CHANCELLOR DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO PROVE THINGS: “THAT FINAL SENTENCE WAS BOTH INACCURATE AND MISLEADING”

July 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

A body charged with the delivery of legal services to some of the most vulnerable people in our society (and which, incidentally, is in charge of the justice system) should  be making decisions that are logical and justifiable – you…

HOURLY RATES AND COMPLEX CASES: MASTER MAY HAVE APPLIED THE WRONG TEST BUT CAME TO THE RIGHT RESULT

HOURLY RATES AND COMPLEX CASES: MASTER MAY HAVE APPLIED THE WRONG TEST BUT CAME TO THE RIGHT RESULT

July 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In JXA v Kettering General Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 1747 (QB) Mr Justice Goss rejected an appeal in relation to hourly rates of the claimant’s solicitor in a high value clinical negligence case. THE CASE The claimant had been…

UNDERPAYMENT OF COURT FEES IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: HOWEVER DESPITE THIS AN ACTION WAS ISSUED WITHIN TIME & WOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT

UNDERPAYMENT OF COURT FEES IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: HOWEVER DESPITE THIS AN ACTION WAS ISSUED WITHIN TIME & WOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT

July 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Limitation, Members Content, Sanctions

In the judgment today in  Atha & Co Solicitors v Liddle [2018] EWHC 1751 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the issue of whether a failure to pay the correct fee on the issue of proceedings meant that a claim was…

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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • MAZUR MATTERS 40: “A DAMNING INDICTMENT OF REGULATORY FAILURE”: CHAIR OF THE LEGAL SERVICES CONSUMER PANEL PULLS NO PUNCHES…
  • PART 35 QUESTIONS AND AGENDAS FOR EXPERT MEETINGS – A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS AND EXPERTS: WEBINAR 3rd DECEMBER 2025
  • “SECOND APPEALS” FROM THE CIRCUIT JUDGE: WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE VENUE FOR APPEAL AND WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA APPLIED?
  • COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDERS, CONTINUING BREACHES AND CONTEMPT OF COURT: AN INDIVIDUAL RESPONDENT WOULD HAVE GONE TO JAIL
  • AIRLINE’S ATTEMPT TO “CHALLENGE JURISDICTION” FAILS TO TAKE OFF: “I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE DEFENDANT HAS DEFENDED THIS ACTION IN THE MANNER IN WHICH IT HAS”

Top Posts

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 39 : CASE ALLEGING NEGLIGENCE IN PLEADING DISMISSED - BECAUSE IT WAS NOT FULLY PLEADED (AND DID NOT ESTABLISH BREACH IN ANY EVENT)
  • MAZUR MATTERS 40: "A DAMNING INDICTMENT OF REGULATORY FAILURE": CHAIR OF THE LEGAL SERVICES CONSUMER PANEL PULLS NO PUNCHES...
  • AIRLINE'S ATTEMPT TO "CHALLENGE JURISDICTION" FAILS TO TAKE OFF: "I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE DEFENDANT HAS DEFENDED THIS ACTION IN THE MANNER IN WHICH IT HAS"
  • COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDERS, CONTINUING BREACHES AND CONTEMPT OF COURT: AN INDIVIDUAL RESPONDENT WOULD HAVE GONE TO JAIL
  • COST BITES 311: YES THIS CASE WAS COST BUDGETED (AND THE PAYING PARTIES AGREED THE BUDGET): "ONLY THE CLAIMANTS CAN CATEGORICALLY ATTEST WHETHER THEY AGREED THE DEFENDANTS' BUDGET TACTICALLY OR NOT"

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, 2013-2025. 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...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.