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.
Browse: Home » 2019 » January » 02
BEING A LITIGATOR: “WHAT I’D TELL A YOUNGER ME" 2: BRIE STEVENS-HOARE QC

BEING A LITIGATOR: “WHAT I’D TELL A YOUNGER ME” 2: BRIE STEVENS-HOARE QC

January 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure

In the second in this series I popped into chambers at Hardwicke and  spoke to  property and probate  law litigator Brie Stevens-Hoare QC.  A QC since 2013  Brie is also  Deputy Adjudicator to HM Land Registry and sits as a fee-paid…

ADVERSE INFERENCES DRAWN WHEN SOLICITOR DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE: IF YOU'VE HAD £22 MILLION YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN IT

ADVERSE INFERENCES DRAWN WHEN SOLICITOR DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE: IF YOU’VE HAD £22 MILLION YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN IT

January 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Witness statements

In The Lord Chancellor v Blavo & Co Solictors Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 3556 (QB) Mr Justice Pepperall found it was appropriate to draw adverse inferences when key  participants did not give evidence.  It is another example of the principles…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2021. 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 23,048 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • APPEAL ALLOWED WHERE THE TRIAL JUDGE DEPARTED FROM THE PLEADED CASE: “A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE JUDGE’S FUNCTION)
  • PROVING THINGS 206: THE EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT) ACT 1969 IN ACTION
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6TH APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE CLIENT HAS TO SIGN – AND WHY IT POINTS STRAIGHT BACK AT YOU
  • THINGS THAT LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: SCOWL AND POUT… & ROLL YOUR EYES
  • CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END

Top Posts & Pages

  • THINGS THAT LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: SCOWL AND POUT... & ROLL YOUR EYES
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6TH APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE CLIENT HAS TO SIGN - AND WHY IT POINTS STRAIGHT BACK AT YOU
  • PROVING THINGS 206: THE EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT) ACT 1969 IN ACTION
  • APPEAL ALLOWED WHERE THE TRIAL JUDGE DEPARTED FROM THE PLEADED CASE: "A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE JUDGE'S FUNCTION)
  • CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END

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

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • 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 © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin