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 » October » 28
WITNESS SUMMARIES,  WITNESS SUMMONSES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL IN ONE CASE...

WITNESS SUMMARIES, WITNESS SUMMONSES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL IN ONE CASE…

October 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Morley (t/a Morley Estates) v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc [2019] EWHC 2865 (Ch) Mr Justice Kerr granted the claimant’s application to rely on witness summaries and refused the defendant’s application to set aside witness summonses.  The judge…

PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)

PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)

October 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions

Today seems a good day to consider prospective applications for extensions of time. These are going to figure in every litigators career at some point.  A knowledge of the relevant law is essential. A prospective application of time is dealt…

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 22,960 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND…
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: “DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE”
  • CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 91: MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT IS STILL ALIVE WHEN YOU ISSUE – AT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL: A SITUATION THAT IS UTTERLY BIZARRE
  • I WILL WALK 150 MILES: MARCHING AGAINST CANCER IN MARCH…

Top Posts & Pages

  • CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 91: MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT IS STILL ALIVE WHEN YOU ISSUE - AT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL: A SITUATION THAT IS UTTERLY BIZARRE
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: "DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE"
  • THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND...
  • I WILL WALK 150 MILES: MARCHING AGAINST CANCER IN MARCH...
  • PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: "THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE... IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK"

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