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 » 28
ORDER GRANTING TIME TO EXTEND SERVICE SET ASIDE: THE DEEMED DATE FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A BLAST FROM THE PAST: STILL APPLIES TO SERVICE ABROAD

ORDER GRANTING TIME TO EXTEND SERVICE SET ASIDE: THE DEEMED DATE FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A BLAST FROM THE PAST: STILL APPLIES TO SERVICE ABROAD

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The judgment in Punjab National Bank (International) Ltd v Srinivasan & Ors [2019] EWHC 89 (Ch) contains two interesting lessons (i) a court can always set aside an order extending time for service of proceedings; (ii) the “old” rules relating to…

WHEN THE COURT LETS YOU DOWN: A WORRYING CHRONOLOGY

WHEN THE COURT LETS YOU DOWN: A WORRYING CHRONOLOGY

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Members Content

In  BC v BG [2019] EWFC 7  the court rejected an application to set aside an arbitration award made in ancillary relief proceedings. The application was unsuccessful (and the applicant awarded to pay costs). However the issue of concern is the…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 26: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 26: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In civil proceedings witnesses are commonly present throughout an entire action. On occasions a request is made that witnesses be excluded.  There is little authority for the proposition that a court can exclude witnesses or guidance as to how the discretion…

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POLICE REPORTS AS EVIDENCE: NO NEGLIGENCE WHEN DRIVER FEARED HE WAS TO BE ASSAULTED: A CASE TO POINT

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POLICE REPORTS AS EVIDENCE: NO NEGLIGENCE WHEN DRIVER FEARED HE WAS TO BE ASSAULTED: A CASE TO POINT

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Mohmed v Barnes & Anor [2019] EWHC 87 (QB) Mr Justice Turner found that a driver had not been negligent when he drove into a pedestrian an attempt to escape an assault. The case is important in relation to an…

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

  • COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATIONS TO AMEND AND TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS: A SUBMISSION THAT “WELL WE WERE LYING WHEN WE SIGNED THOSE STATEMENTS OF TRUTH” IS NOT A GOOD STARTING PLACE
  • ADVISING THE CLIENT OF THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: TEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS COUPLED WITH THE RELEVANT LINKS
  • PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 5 : WHY A SOLICITOR CAN BE NEGLIGENT, A CLAIMANT HONEST AND YET BE WHOLLY UNSUCCESSFUL IN A PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE ACTION
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS “HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS”: A USEFUL CHECKLIST AND LINKS TO KEEP YOU ON THE STRAIGHT AND NARROW
  • SERVICE POINTS 54: THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN TIME: THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON A DEFENDANT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 7.7: THE ACTION BITES THE DUST

Top Posts

COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS...)
EXPERT WATCH 71: "I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE": THE EXPERT WAS "ADVOCATING" AND "HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL"
THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE RIGHT TO REPLY: WHEN MUST YOU DO IT AND WHEN SHOULD YOU DO IT? THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF A DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM

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.