Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2019 » January » 10
DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE REFUSED: AN ORDER WOULD NOT SAVE COSTS OR ASSIST THE DISPUTE TO BE RESOLVED WITHOUT PROCEEDINGS

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE REFUSED: AN ORDER WOULD NOT SAVE COSTS OR ASSIST THE DISPUTE TO BE RESOLVED WITHOUT PROCEEDINGS

January 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content

In Lacey v Leonard [2018] EWHC 3528 (QB) Mrs Justice Slade DBE upheld a decision refusing the defendant’s application for pre-action disclosure.  The primary ground for refusal was that disclosure of medical records, and various documents relating to employment, would not…

LITIGANTS IN PERSON AND THE USE OF COURT TIME: AN EXAMPLE OF THINGS TO COME?

LITIGANTS IN PERSON AND THE USE OF COURT TIME: AN EXAMPLE OF THINGS TO COME?

January 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Applications, Litigants in person, Members Content

The case of  Zaman v Portsmouth City Council [2018] EWHC 3592 (QB) makes interesting reading for anyone concerned about the effect that the increasing number of litigants in person could have on the court system. THE CASE The claimant sought payment…

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

  • EXPERT WATCH 64: LOOKING AT THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN EXPERT REPORTING BADLY
  • COST BITES 428 : IF THERE IS NO CHARGING CLAUSE IN THE WILL CAN THE SOLICITOR GET PAID?
  • COST BITES 427: WHEN A SOLICITOR ABANDONS AN ASSESSMENT: PERSONAL LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW
  • COURT REFUSES PERMISSION TO CHANGE NAME OF THE CLAIMANT AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE DANGERS OF LEAVING THINGS LATE
  • THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON

Top Posts

COST BITES 426: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK SHOULD PAY COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUING: "THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK IS DESIGNED TO BE DIFFERENT"
THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN COURT: AN INTERESTING PRACTICE DIRECTION FROM THE HIGH COURT IN IRELAND : GOOD ADVICE FOR US ALL
COST BITES 424: A CLAIM FOR 30.5 HOURS IN ONE DAY: A SCHEDULE "SO UNRELIABLE IT CANNOT FORM THE BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT"
ATTEMPTING TO RE-WRITE A DRAFT JUDGMENT: THIS HARDLY EVER (IF EVER) PERSUADES A JUDGE THAT THEY WERE WRONG

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.