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 » 31
APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM REFUSED: CLAIMANT'S CASE AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT GOES UP IN SMOKE...

APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM REFUSED: CLAIMANT’S CASE AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT GOES UP IN SMOKE…

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Viner -v- Volkswagen Group Limited [2018] EWHC 2006 (QB) Senior Master Fontaine refused the claimants’ application to extend time for service of the claim form. A link to the judgment is available from the Law Society Gazette article on…

FULL QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT EXTEND TO "MIXED CLAIMS": THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL

FULL QOCS PROTECTION DOES NOT EXTEND TO “MIXED CLAIMS”: THE COURT HAS A DISCRETION: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, QOCS

In  The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis v Brown [2018] EWHC 2046 (Admin) Mrs Justice Whipple held that a claim against the police for misuse of data, misfeasance in public office and misuse of private information, did not give rise…

CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMPARE AND CONTRAST: EDITING STATEMENTS CAN AFFECT CREDIBILITY

CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMPARE AND CONTRAST: EDITING STATEMENTS CAN AFFECT CREDIBILITY

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment case of ML (A Child) v Guy’s And St Thomas’ National Healthcare Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 2010 has an interesting passage on witness statements. It is an example of how early witness statements that were not initially disclosed can…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36: IT IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER JUST BECAUSE THE PARTIES SAY SO: OFFERS CAN ONLY BE ASSESSED BY REFERENCE TO THE PLEADINGS

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONSTRUCTION OF PART 36: IT IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER JUST BECAUSE THE PARTIES SAY SO: OFFERS CAN ONLY BE ASSESSED BY REFERENCE TO THE PLEADINGS

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Hertel & Anor v Saunders & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1831 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that an offer made was not a valid Part 36 offer.  It was held that a Part 36 offer had to be…

THE DEFENDANT IS NOT THE CLAIMANT'S KEEPER: WOODWARD DECISION ON SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: LEAVING SERVICE LATE IS SIMPLY COURTING DISASTER

THE DEFENDANT IS NOT THE CLAIMANT’S KEEPER: WOODWARD DECISION ON SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: LEAVING SERVICE LATE IS SIMPLY COURTING DISASTER

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

There is a brief report on Lawtel this morning showing that the decision in Woodward & Anor v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2018] EWHC 334 (Ch) has been overturned on appeal.   It highlights the dangers of leaving service of the claim form…

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

  • 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
  • "SECOND APPEALS" FROM THE CIRCUIT JUDGE: WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE VENUE FOR APPEAL AND WHAT ARE THE CRITERIA APPLIED?
  • PART 35 QUESTIONS AND AGENDAS FOR EXPERT MEETINGS - A GUIDE FOR PRACTITIONERS AND EXPERTS: WEBINAR 3rd DECEMBER 2025

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.