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 » November » 14
ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF"

ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF”

November 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Parties to actions, Relief from sanctions

In ABC v Google LLC [2019] EWHC 3020 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini refused an (anonymous) claimants application for relief from sanctions.  The case has some unusual features, however it does highlight the point that a relief from sanctions application…

AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL ON A COSTS BUDGETING DECISION: SHOULD A QC BE ALLOWED - OR IS THAT A LEADING QUESTION?

AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL ON A COSTS BUDGETING DECISION: SHOULD A QC BE ALLOWED – OR IS THAT A LEADING QUESTION?

November 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting

The case of  Easteye Ltd v Malhotra Property Investments Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 2820 (Ch) is unusual in that it is an appeal against a costs budgeting decision.  Nugee J refused the claimant’s appeal against the District Judge’s decision…

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.
In-House Webinar

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 22,669 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • LAWFULNESS OF DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • PROVING THINGS 200: ALL THE SERIES IN ONE PLACE: THE (VERY) EXPENSIVE COSTS OF FAILING TO THINK FULLY ABOUT EVIDENCE
  • CLAIMANT NOT SUCCESSFUL IN APPLICATION THAT A WITNESS ATTEND IN PERSON AND NOT REMOTELY
  • “HIS WITNESS STATEMENT … CONTAINED A GREAT DEAL OF ANALYSIS, SUBMISSION AND COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS”
  • PROVING THINGS 199: “THE BITTER TRUTH”: INNOCENT PARTIES MAY SUFFER NO LOSSES – AND RECEIVE NO DAMAGES

Top Posts & Pages

  • LAWFULNESS OF DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • PROVING THINGS 200: ALL THE SERIES IN ONE PLACE: THE (VERY) EXPENSIVE COSTS OF FAILING TO THINK FULLY ABOUT EVIDENCE
  • A WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO ARGUE THE CASE: YET ANOTHER JUDICIAL REMINDER
  • TRIAL BUNDLES: TIMING, CONTENTS AND PRESENTATION : AND DO YOU KNOW SEDLEY’S LAWS?
  • CLAIMANT NOT SUCCESSFUL IN APPLICATION THAT A WITNESS ATTEND IN PERSON AND NOT REMOTELY

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.
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin