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 » September » 06
IF YOU WANT A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER YOU NEED TO "SHOUT" OUT IN ADVANCE: "YOU NEVER GIVE ME YOUR MONEY..."

IF YOU WANT A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER YOU NEED TO “SHOUT” OUT IN ADVANCE: “YOU NEVER GIVE ME YOUR MONEY…”

September 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Sony/ATV Music Publishing LLC & Anor v WPMC Ltd & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 2005 the Court of Appeal overturned a ruling that a director of a company should pay pay a company’s costs.  The absence of warning was a…

APPLYING FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING A DEFENCE - AFTER THE DEFENCE IS DUE: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

APPLYING FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING A DEFENCE – AFTER THE DEFENCE IS DUE: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

September 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Default judgment,, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of Deputy Master Pickering in Billington v Davies & Anor [2016] EWHC 1919 (Ch) has only recently appeared on BAILLI. It raises an interesting issue of how the courts should approach the question of a late application to extend…

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

  • WEBINAR ON PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: 9th SEPTEMBER 2026: USEFUL GUIDANCE, CHECKLISTS AND QUESTIONNAIRES
  • SHOULD (OR CAN) THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE WHEN THE PROPOSED DEFENDANT IS BASED IN ITALY? ANOTHER PAD APPLICATION COMES TO GRIEF…
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY:”WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THINGS GO WRONG BLAME THE SOLICITOR” (SEPTEMBER 2016)
  • SHOULD THE COURT ORDER PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE? THE JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT SATISFIED AND THE COURT WOULD NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN ANY EVENT
  • COST BITES 446 : SHOULD THE COURT HAVE MADE A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER? SHOULD THE APPELLANT HAVE BEEN CROSS-EXAMINED AND WAS THE COURT BOUND TO ACCEPT HIS EVIDENCE?

Top Posts

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.