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 » 18
EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I usually look at cases in the family courts when there are judgments that may be of some interest to civil litigators.  The judgment  of Mr Justice Keehan in M v Derbyshire County Council & Ors [2018] EWHC 3734 (Fam) …

FATAL ACCIDENTS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th MARCH 2019

FATAL ACCIDENTS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th MARCH 2019

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Courses, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

I am presenting a webinar on avoiding the pitfalls in fatal accident claims on the 29th March 2019, 1 – 2 pm. The idea came about from of a number of search terms that led to this blog, including “fatal…

PROVING THINGS 137: PROVING A DEFENCE TO A COUNTERCLAIM: NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE MATTERS - THEN JUDGMENT IS GOING TO BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU

PROVING THINGS 137: PROVING A DEFENCE TO A COUNTERCLAIM: NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE MATTERS – THEN JUDGMENT IS GOING TO BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in UK Dry Risers Ltd v Maher [2019] EWHC 44 (QB) shows the importance of being able to prove a defence to a counterclaim. The claimant succeeded on a claim for £3,690.72, the defendant obtained a judgment for £13,628.00. …

THE SPI NORTH (NON-ADMISSION IN PLEADING CASE) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE SECOND POINT: COMPELLING EVIDENCE NEEDED AND NO SATELLITE LITIGATION PLEASE

THE SPI NORTH (NON-ADMISSION IN PLEADING CASE) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE SECOND POINT: COMPELLING EVIDENCE NEEDED AND NO SATELLITE LITIGATION PLEASE

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Yesterday’s post on SPI North Ltd v Swiss Post International (UK) Ltd & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 7  concentrated upon the Court of Appeal guidance in relation to the drafting of a pleading.  However the second point on which the claimant’s appeal …

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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES 393: A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LAW FIRMS WAS VALID: THERE WAS NO BREACH (AND IF THERE WAS IT WAS NOT MATERIAL): FRESH OFF THE PRESS – JUDGMENT THIS AFTERNOON
  • AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A “MINOR ERROR…”
  • AN APPEAL OVER A TIME ESTIMATE FOR TRIAL: THIS SHOULD NOT LAST 15 DAYS, NOR WILL IT BE DONE IN 5: EIGHT DAYS REMAINS THE CORRECT CONCLUSION
  • EXPERT WATCH 48: HOW AN EXPERT WITNESS CAN LOSE CREDIBILITY AT TRIAL (IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE – BUT THE PRINCIPLES ARE UNIVERSAL…)
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.