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 » July
COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT OF DEFENCE - SIDESTEPPING THE LATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE ARGUMENT: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIES

COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT OF DEFENCE – SIDESTEPPING THE LATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE ARGUMENT: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIES

July 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

 In Hanson & Ors v Carlino & Anor [2019] EWHC 1940 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk neatly sidestepped the vexed question of when a claimant can enter judgment in default of acknowledgement of service by entering judgment in default of defence. …

WHEN YOU ARE CHALLENGING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT "BE PREPARED": MASTER FINDS THAT COURT COSTS OFFICERS DO HAVE JURISDICTION TO CONDUCT PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENTS: THE LIMITED SCOPE OF AN APPEAL FROM A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT

WHEN YOU ARE CHALLENGING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT “BE PREPARED”: MASTER FINDS THAT COURT COSTS OFFICERS DO HAVE JURISDICTION TO CONDUCT PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENTS: THE LIMITED SCOPE OF AN APPEAL FROM A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT

July 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Robin Dunne for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Leonard in PME -v- The Scout Association (30/07/2019).    1. JUDGMENT PME (003).  This deals with two issues (i) the jurisdiction of…

JOB ADVERTISEMENT: IMMIGRATION CASEWORKER/SOLICITOR - BASED IN SHEFFIELD.

JOB ADVERTISEMENT: IMMIGRATION CASEWORKER/SOLICITOR – BASED IN SHEFFIELD.

July 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Job Advert, Members Content

I am continuing to advertise voluntary sector jobs whilst Nearly Legal is on pause.  This job is in Sheffield. ATLEU job vacancy – Immigration Caseworker/Solicitor Salary:               £21,000 to £27,000 p/a (depending on experience…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 4: AVIATION, PLANES, AIRPORTS AND BALLOONS: VICIOUS RULES APPLY

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 4: AVIATION, PLANES, AIRPORTS AND BALLOONS: VICIOUS RULES APPLY

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is the fourth in the series. The purpose of this post is to make you feel really uncomfortable when you are involved with a case that involves aviation and personal injury, in any way shape or form. Including when…

THE GESTMIN PRINCIPLES IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: JUDGE DOUBTS WHETHER THEY CAN BE DIRECTLY APPLIED IN OTHER CONTEXTS

THE GESTMIN PRINCIPLES IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: JUDGE DOUBTS WHETHER THEY CAN BE DIRECTLY APPLIED IN OTHER CONTEXTS

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at the judicial assessment of evidence, particularly witness evidence.  Often this is done by reference to the “Gestmin” criteria. In CXB -v-North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust, [2019] EWHC 2053 (QB) HH Judge Gore…

AGREEMENTS TO EXTEND TIME : THEY CAN BE A GOOD THING - BUT MUST BE DONE PROPERLY

AGREEMENTS TO EXTEND TIME : THEY CAN BE A GOOD THING – BUT MUST BE DONE PROPERLY

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content

In Cowan v Foreman & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1336 the Court of Appeal were far more supportive of the idea that parties in Inheritance Act claims could agree a “limitation amnesty”.  However an agreement has to be drafted with…

FIXED COSTS: APPLY TO DEFENDANTS AS WELL: SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE AND THE GANDER

FIXED COSTS: APPLY TO DEFENDANTS AS WELL: SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE AND THE GANDER

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me a copy of consent order made in the Court of Appeal.   The Court allowed an appeal, by consent, that the defendant to certain applications was only allowed fixed costs in an…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 3: 10 MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER SHOULD KNOW

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 3: 10 MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER SHOULD KNOW

July 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

Here we look at ten “myths” (that is misconceptions) about limitation that can lead to personal injury litigators getting into difficulties. Myth 1:  In a breach of contract case the limitation period is six years.  This is clearly a prevalent…

JOB ADVERT: DISCRIMINATION LEGAL ADVISOR: SUFFOLK LAW CENTRE.

JOB ADVERT: DISCRIMINATION LEGAL ADVISOR: SUFFOLK LAW CENTRE.

July 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Members Content

Suffolk Law Centre has a job vacancy. The details are below.   The vacancy can also be viewed online here.  Tackling Discrimination in the East   Part-Time Discrimination Legal Advisor   Job Share: 22.2 Hours (specific times by agreement)   Salary:          …

CLAIMANT'S PART 36 "SUBJECT TO A NIL CRU" WAS A VALID OFFER: IF THE DEFENDANT WAS CONFUSED THEY SHOULD HAVE SOUGHT CLARIFICATION

CLAIMANT’S PART 36 “SUBJECT TO A NIL CRU” WAS A VALID OFFER: IF THE DEFENDANT WAS CONFUSED THEY SHOULD HAVE SOUGHT CLARIFICATION

July 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment of District Judge Hickinbottom in Gibbons -v- Rotherham Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust (o4/06/2019), discussed in an earlier post, also has an interesting section in relation to a Part 36 offer. “It seems to me the Defendant could…

CASE FALLING OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: ASSAULT BY A VULNERABLE ADULT: REPORT OF A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION: FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY

CASE FALLING OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: ASSAULT BY A VULNERABLE ADULT: REPORT OF A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION: FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to solicitor John McQuater for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Hickinbottom in Gibbons -v- Rotherham Doncaster and South Humber NHS Foundation Trust (o4/06/2019).  It concerns the question of whether an assault by…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2: HOW DO YOU MISS THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2: HOW DO YOU MISS THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

This series looks at avoiding negligence claims in litigation, personal injury litigation in particular.  The easiest (and most common) method of a negligence claim is missing the limitation period. How does anyone miss a three year limitation period?  The basic…

DELAY OF 18 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT DID NOT UNDERMINE THE JUDGE'S VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY

DELAY OF 18 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT DID NOT UNDERMINE THE JUDGE’S VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Nuttal & Anor v Kerr & Anor [2019] EWHC 1977 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman rejected an argument that an excessive delay in giving judgment meant that the trial judge’s conclusions were innately unreliable.  (The judgment also reviews the authorities…

BUNDLES AGAIN: DOUBLE SIDED BUNDLES - A MUST AT TRIAL - A NO, NO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (DOES NOBODY THINK OF THE TREES...)

BUNDLES AGAIN: DOUBLE SIDED BUNDLES – A MUST AT TRIAL – A NO, NO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (DOES NOBODY THINK OF THE TREES…)

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Members Content

  There was much excitement about the rules changes so that bundles for applications and trials should be double-sided.  However nothing is consistent in legal procedure. I am grateful to barrister Matt Jackson for sending me a (highly redacted) copy…

RAISING NEW ISSUES ON APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS THE LAW: CIRCUIT JUDGE CORRECT TO ALLOW NEW ISSUE TO BE ARGUED IN RELATION TO INTEREST RATES

RAISING NEW ISSUES ON APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS THE LAW: CIRCUIT JUDGE CORRECT TO ALLOW NEW ISSUE TO BE ARGUED IN RELATION TO INTEREST RATES

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content

In Notting Hill Finance Ltd v Sheikh [2019] EWCA Civ 1337 the Court of Appeal reviewed the principles relating to new matters being raised on appeal.     “These authorities show that there is no general rule that a case…

RECOVERING THE COST OF ATTENDING THE INQUEST: MUST BE BOTH RELEVANT AND PROPORTIONATE (BUT PROPORTIONALITY IS NOT JUST ABOUT MONEY)

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Proportionality

The judgment today in Fullick & Ors v The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2019] EWHC 1941 (QB) deals with the, often challenging, question of whether the costs of attending an inquest is recoverable in cases where the claimant…

LEGAL AID MATTERS: SUCH A WONDERFUL LITTLE BOOK - A REVIEW OF 70 YEARS OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF LEGAL AID TO OUR SOCIETY

LEGAL AID MATTERS: SUCH A WONDERFUL LITTLE BOOK – A REVIEW OF 70 YEARS OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF LEGAL AID TO OUR SOCIETY

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Book Review, Members Content

This small, but important, book from the Justice Alliance is (I imagine) deliberately designed to resemble the campaigning pamphlets that used to be an essential part of public and political debate.  It was printed by the Legal Action Group and…

THE CHANGE IN THE DISCOUNT RATE:  LINKS TO THE NEW SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES

THE CHANGE IN THE DISCOUNT RATE: LINKS TO THE NEW SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Damages, Members Content, Useful links

The change in the discount rate has led to the Government Actuary’s Department producing supplementary tables which include the – 0.25% rate.  The relevant page can be found here.   LINKS TO THE TABLES Actuarial tables for use in personal…

DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS MENTIONED IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: MENTION MUST MEAN "SPECIFICALLY MENTION"

DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS MENTIONED IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: MENTION MUST MEAN “SPECIFICALLY MENTION”

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Rudd v Bridle & Anor [2019] EWHC 1986 (QB) also considered, and rejected, the claimant’s application for specific disclosure of documents.  Mr Justice Warby held that for an order to be made under CPR 31.15 there must be…

COURT REFUSES TO MAKE ORDER THAT A DEFENDANT DISCLOSES FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS

COURT REFUSES TO MAKE ORDER THAT A DEFENDANT DISCLOSES FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS

July 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content

In Rudd v Bridle & Anor [2019] EWHC 1986 (QB) Mr Justice Warby refused a claimant’s application for disclosure of the defendants’ funding arrangements.   “Beyond this is the common-sense point, that the Court will not be keen to allow…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION: A LAWYER'S GUIDE: PREFACE FOR THE SERIES

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION: A LAWYER’S GUIDE: PREFACE FOR THE SERIES

July 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content

I am re-writing  and expanding upon an earlier series of posts on the topic of  avoiding negligence claims.  This is mainly aimed at personal injury practitioners, however many of the posts relate to procedure and will be of more general…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 56: ADVISING ON THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: "CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 56: ADVISING ON THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”

July 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Risks of litigation

The difficulties facing those giving advice about litigation is summed up in a judgment of Sedley LJ  “Clients, I know, want two inconsistent things. They want confident advice on which they can act, and they want cautionary advice about the…

ANOTHER POST ON THE AUTHORITIES BUNDLE: THE SUPREME COURT SAY THEY SHOULD BE IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER: GUIDANCE FROM THE NICE LAWYERS OF TWITTER

July 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Members Content

Earlier today I reported on a comment from the Court of Appeal that it did not help for authorities to be placed in alphabetical order.  I commented on the absence of clear guidance.  Here we look at the views from…

PROVING THINGS 160: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED:  COURT CAN DIRECT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE BE FILED

PROVING THINGS 160: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED: COURT CAN DIRECT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE BE FILED

July 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Extensions of time, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Hendry v Hendry & Ors [2019] EWHC 1976 (Ch) Master Shuman refused the claimant’s application for an extension of time to bring proceedings under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. THE CASE The claimant was married…

A SECOND POST ABOUT BUNDLES OF AUTHORITIES: SORTING OF AUTHORITIES BY ALPHABETICAL ORDER NOT HELPFUL: COMMENTS FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY

A SECOND POST ABOUT BUNDLES OF AUTHORITIES: SORTING OF AUTHORITIES BY ALPHABETICAL ORDER NOT HELPFUL: COMMENTS FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY

July 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Members Content

The Court of Appeal adjourned the hearing today in Swift -v- Carpenter.  Looking at the footage at 1.04 you can see a comment by the court in relation to the bundle of authorities.   THE BUNDLE WAS IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER…

CAN YOU ENTER JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT WHEN THE DEFENCE IS SERVED LATE? HIGH COURT  DECISION THAT SAYS NOT

CAN YOU ENTER JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT WHEN THE DEFENCE IS SERVED LATE? HIGH COURT DECISION THAT SAYS NOT

July 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

In Clements Smith v Berrymans Lace Mawer Service Co. & Anor [2019] EWHC 1904 (QB) Master McCloud considered the issue of whether a judgment entered after a defence had been filed late was a regular judgment. Permission was given to…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 55: THE 70 KEY POINTS OF THE DENTON JUDGMENT

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 55: THE 70 KEY POINTS OF THE DENTON JUDGMENT

July 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment in Denton -v- White [2014] EWCA Civ 906 was given five years ago. It is a case that is still cited daily in the courts. It can be misunderstood or misquoted. Here are the 70 key points of this…

PROVING THINGS 159: A FORMULAIC APPROACH TO EVIDENCE WHICH LEADS TO CONFIRMATION BIAS:  THE DANGERS OF PRO FORMA EVIDENCE GATHERING

PROVING THINGS 159: A FORMULAIC APPROACH TO EVIDENCE WHICH LEADS TO CONFIRMATION BIAS: THE DANGERS OF PRO FORMA EVIDENCE GATHERING

July 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This blog has looked, several times, at the way in which the family courts look at both expert and lay witness evidence.  The judgments of the family courts contain many examples of issues that arise throughout civil litigation. We see…

PROVING THINGS 158: NOW - WHY WOULDN'T BANKS WANT TO REVEAL DETAILS OF THE BONUSES THEY PAID?

PROVING THINGS 158: NOW – WHY WOULDN’T BANKS WANT TO REVEAL DETAILS OF THE BONUSES THEY PAID?

July 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Ltd & Ors v HM Revenue and Customs [2019] EWHC 1922 (Ch) demonstrates a strange position on the part of the claimant bank.  The claimant banks did not adduce any evidence to prove…

RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE:  A COMMENT FROM AN ELDERLY COSTS NERD

RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE: A COMMENT FROM AN ELDERLY COSTS NERD

July 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Members Content

Yesterday I wrote on rights of audience.  This led to a great deal of comment on Twitter and a response from an  elderly costs nerd (who wishes to remain anonymous) has commented on this case: “Your post today about the…

ADVOCATES, ROAD MAPS AND DEPARTING FROM THE STRUCTURE OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

ADVOCATES, ROAD MAPS AND DEPARTING FROM THE STRUCTURE OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

July 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Members Content, Written advocacy

There is an interesting passage in the judgment of Turner J in Court Enforcement Services Ltd v Burlington Credit Ltd [2019] EWHC 1920 (QB) relating to  written submissions and advocacy. “… there appears to me to be a growing trend…

NO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO RECOVER £25,000 FOR LEADING COUNSEL TO ATTEND A LOW LEVEL HEARING  - NOT EVEN ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

NO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO RECOVER £25,000 FOR LEADING COUNSEL TO ATTEND A LOW LEVEL HEARING – NOT EVEN ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

July 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Timokhina v Timokhin [2019] EWCA Civ 1284 the Court of Appeal overturned an order that a mother pay counsel’s fees of certain hearings. The judgment is interesting in that costs were disallowed (inter partes) as unreasonable even when the…

RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE: WHAT IS MEANT BY CHAMBERS? CLAIMANT'S REPRESENTATIVE SENT HOME...

RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE: WHAT IS MEANT BY CHAMBERS? CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE SENT HOME…

July 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Christopher Buckingham for sending me a copy of the judgment in National Westminster Bank -v- Smith. (27th February 2019). A copy of which is attached here E6BA4N32 – National Westminster Bank PLC v Smith (27.02.19)…

PROVING THINGS 157: DEFECTS IN EVIDENCE "SO FUNDAMENTAL" THAT APPLICATION DISMISSED

PROVING THINGS 157: DEFECTS IN EVIDENCE “SO FUNDAMENTAL” THAT APPLICATION DISMISSED

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Mircom International Content Management & Consulting Ltd & Ors v Virgin Media Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 1827 (Ch) Mr Recorder Campbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application on the grounds that the evidence was…

CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2019

CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2019

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Courses, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am giving a webinar on the 10th September 2019: “CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT!” CONTENT The webinar will cover: The law as to loss of earnings How a claim for…

PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In West -v- Stockport NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 1220 the Court of Appeal considered the question of proportionality in relation to clinical negligence actions and the “recoverable” element of ATE insurance.  I am grateful to Sean Linley for…

PREPARE A NON-COMPLIANT BUNDLE OF AUTHORITIES: THE RISKS OF COSTS BEING DISALLOWED: COURT OF APPEAL SOUNDS A WARNING

PREPARE A NON-COMPLIANT BUNDLE OF AUTHORITIES: THE RISKS OF COSTS BEING DISALLOWED: COURT OF APPEAL SOUNDS A WARNING

July 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Case Management, Members Content

In  the judgment today in Parr v Keystone Healthcare Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1246 Lord Justice Lewison expressed concerns about the failure to follow the Practice Direction on the citation of authorities.   THE CASE The Court of…

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR 4: THE GOOD STUFF  ABOUT BEING A LITIGATOR - FROM NICE LAWYERS

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR 4: THE GOOD STUFF ABOUT BEING A LITIGATOR – FROM NICE LAWYERS

July 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Contest, Charity,, Members Content, Well being

This is the final post in this series. Readers may be best advised to keep coming back to it.  I have asked on Twitter for positive views and contributions about being a litigator. As an incentive there is a prize…

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR 3: THINGS WILL GO WRONG, ADMIT IT, DEAL WITH IT AND NEVER, EVER, EVER ATTEMPT TO HIDE IT

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR 3: THINGS WILL GO WRONG, ADMIT IT, DEAL WITH IT AND NEVER, EVER, EVER ATTEMPT TO HIDE IT

July 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Well being

At sometime in everybody’s legal career there is likely to be a situation when mistakes are made and everything points to you. Mathew Hickey puts the point succinctly in Rocket Lawyer “There will be moments in your legal career when things…

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (2): BE LEGALLY STREETWISE : A LITIGATION CLIENT'S STRATEGY MAY POSSIBLY BE TO BLAME YOU

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (2): BE LEGALLY STREETWISE : A LITIGATION CLIENT’S STRATEGY MAY POSSIBLY BE TO BLAME YOU

July 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Useful links, Well being

In the second in this series I am reminding everyone of a very useful post from Darlingtons solicitors . I said at the time it was first written that it deserved wider publication, and they kindly agreed I could reproduce it. …

APPEAL ON COSTS BUDGETING : CLAIMANT'S APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL: AN OFFER AS TO COSTS DOES NOT BECOME THE BENCHMARK FIGURE

APPEAL ON COSTS BUDGETING : CLAIMANT’S APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL: AN OFFER AS TO COSTS DOES NOT BECOME THE BENCHMARK FIGURE

July 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

In Gray v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2019] EWHC 1780 (QB) Mr Justice Lambert dismissed the claimant’s appeal from cost budgeting decisions.    The judgment contains important observations about the nature of cost budgeting hearings and appeals on…

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (1): READ THIS CASE: BE WARY OF OPENING YOUR MOUTH TOO WIDE: TURN DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GET £2.00 INSTEAD

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (1): READ THIS CASE: BE WARY OF OPENING YOUR MOUTH TOO WIDE: TURN DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GET £2.00 INSTEAD

July 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

A member of my family qualifies as a solicitor tomorrow and starts working in litigation.  I have been pondering the best advice to give a newly qualified litigation solicitor.  I intended a recap post of all those cases where litigants…

"CAN A DEAD PERSON BE TAKEN TO COURT?" : CPR 19.8: A RECAP

“CAN A DEAD PERSON BE TAKEN TO COURT?” : CPR 19.8: A RECAP

July 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There have been a number of search terms arriving on this blog recently relating to the appropriate procedure when a party has died.  Today the question was “can a dead person be taken to court?”  This may be an opportune…

PROVING THINGS 156: MEDICAL EXPERTS, CAUSATION, CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, ABSENT EVIDENCE

PROVING THINGS 156: MEDICAL EXPERTS, CAUSATION, CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, ABSENT EVIDENCE

July 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Experts, Members Content

In ZZZ v Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1642 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham found that there had been a breach of duty by the defendant hospital, but those breaches had no causal relevance.  The case is interesting for…

THE GENERAL DUTY ON LAWYERS TO INFORM THE COURT IF IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE TIME ESTIMATE IS INCORRECT

THE GENERAL DUTY ON LAWYERS TO INFORM THE COURT IF IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE TIME ESTIMATE IS INCORRECT

July 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a judgment today on BAILLI in a family case. The case appears to be subject to reporting restrictions so I do not propose to link to it, or even name it, until these are clarified.  However what is…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 54: SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES SHOULD NOT BE WORKS OF FICTION

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 54: SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES SHOULD NOT BE WORKS OF FICTION

July 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Schedules, Statements of Case

Anyone drafting anything in the litigation process must remain acutely aware that there is real possibility that the document they are drafting will one day be read by a judge.  This is even more likely in relation to a schedule…

FATAL ACCIDENTS 4th EDITION: WANT A FREE  COPY? WHAT DOES YOUR CLIENT NEED YOU KNOW ABOUT BEREAVEMENT?

FATAL ACCIDENTS 4th EDITION: WANT A FREE COPY? WHAT DOES YOUR CLIENT NEED YOU KNOW ABOUT BEREAVEMENT?

July 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Fatal Accidents, Members Content

The 4th edition of Fatal Accidents was published last week.  The publishers, Lexis Nexis, have several copies they can give away.  I am looking for contributions (here or on Twitter) as to the most useful things that lawyers can know,…

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FINER DETAIL: NO ROOM FOR A MARGIN OF ERROR

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FINER DETAIL: NO ROOM FOR A MARGIN OF ERROR

July 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

 A search led to this blog today “witness statement margin” which led me to look this issue up and realise that, despite the dozens of posts on witness statements on this blog,  the important issue of margin size has never…

PROPORTIONALITY: SHOULD HINDSIGHT BE A FACTOR? EXTRACTS FROM O'HARE AND BROWNE ON CIVIL LITIGATION (YOU SAW IT HERE FIRST...)

PROPORTIONALITY: SHOULD HINDSIGHT BE A FACTOR? EXTRACTS FROM O’HARE AND BROWNE ON CIVIL LITIGATION (YOU SAW IT HERE FIRST…)

July 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

I am grateful to John O’Hare for sending me an extract from the next edition of O’Hare and Browne on Civil Litigation (19th edition). It deals with proportionality and, in particular,  whether hindsight should be a factor in assessing proportionality. …

ROBUST DECISION TO STRIKE OUT PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH RULES IS UPHELD ON APPEAL: BANDWAGONS & CRASH HELMETS IN BRADFORD COUNTY COURT

ROBUST DECISION TO STRIKE OUT PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH RULES IS UPHELD ON APPEAL: BANDWAGONS & CRASH HELMETS IN BRADFORD COUNTY COURT

July 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

I am grateful to barrister Toby Coupe for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Gosnell in Aslam -v- The Secretary of State for Justice (17/05/2019), a copy of which is available here.    Aslam v Secretary of…

1 2 Next →

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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE "OPINION" EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY...)
  • ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?

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.