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 » Page 6
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…

CASE NOT STRUCK OUT AFTER  A FOUR YEAR DELAY: ALTERNATIVE "SANCTION" ORDERED INSTEAD

CASE NOT STRUCK OUT AFTER A FOUR YEAR DELAY: ALTERNATIVE “SANCTION” ORDERED INSTEAD

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

In  Alba Exotic Fruit SH PK v MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. [2019] EWHC 1779 (Comm) HHJ Rawlings considered the appropriate sanction where there had been a four year delay by the claimant in pursuing an action. This case is…

A SECOND - IDENTICAL - APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS AND DISMISSED ON THAT GROUND ALONE

A SECOND – IDENTICAL – APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS AND DISMISSED ON THAT GROUND ALONE

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  Lambert v Forest of Dean District Council & Ors [2019] EWHC 1763 (Ch) ICC Judge Mullen rejected an application on the grounds that it was an abuse of process. An identical application had been made earlier and struck out…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53A: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES: ALI -v-CHANNEL 5

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53A: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES: ALI -v-CHANNEL 5

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Relief from sanctions

Shortly after I completed the post on Part 36 offers after the costs budget has been confined to court fees Professor Dominic Regan reminded me that there is another example in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC…

TWO SHORT TWEETS THAT SUM UP THE STATE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION IN 2019

TWO SHORT TWEETS THAT SUM UP THE STATE OF COURT ADMINISTRATION IN 2019

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In the civil courts we don’t have someone like the Secret Barrister who exposes, carefully, clearly and meticulously,  the shortcomings in the justice system. However two tweets from yesterday seem to me to exemplify the current state of court administration….

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 53: PART 36 AND COSTS AFTER THE COURT HAS LIMITED THE BUDGET TO COURT FEES

July 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This may be an ambitious subject for the back to basics series. However here I want to look at the situation where a party has failed to file their costs budget timeously and the budget has been confined to court…

"A BIT OF A SHORT BALL": STATING THE JUDGE'S PRELIMINARY VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO BIAS

“A BIT OF A SHORT BALL”: STATING THE JUDGE’S PRELIMINARY VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO BIAS

July 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content

There is an interesting discussion as to Judicial bias in the judgment of Mrs Justice Theis in X v Y (Permission to Appeal) [2019] EWHC 1713 (Fam). “The interjections by the judge during the hearing should be viewed not as…

THE ROLE OF THE SOLICITOR IN PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION: IDEAS TAKEN FROM THE SECRET BARRISTER

July 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Advocacy, Members Content, Personal Injury

There was a tweet yesterday from someone (a non-lawyer) asserting that personal injury lawyers did not need to know the law.  His purpose, I suspect, was to lead on to an argument that the work could be done by someone…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 52: THE REPLY AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: TO REPLY OR NOT TO REPLY - THAT IS THE QUESTION

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 52: THE REPLY AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: TO REPLY OR NOT TO REPLY – THAT IS THE QUESTION

July 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we take a quick look at the rules and practice directions in relation to filing a Reply and  Defence to a Counterclaim.  In particular claimants should be very aware of the fact that a defendant can apply to enter…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 51: BULLOCK AND SANDERSON ORDERS: COSTS WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 51: BULLOCK AND SANDERSON ORDERS: COSTS WHERE THERE ARE MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS

July 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

When writing the previous post about a Bullock order it struck me that there may be some people not quite certain of what a “Bullock order ” or “Sanderson order” is. This gives rise to a need to explain those…

THE TRIAL JUDGE COULD SAY BULLOCKS TO THE COST ORDER: ON APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO BULLISH

THE TRIAL JUDGE COULD SAY BULLOCKS TO THE COST ORDER: ON APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO BULLISH

July 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  Fouladi v Darout Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 1674 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr refused an appeal against the making of a “Bullock” order in relation to the costs of a fourth defendant.  The claimant, however, was not successful…

MEMORY IS FLUID AND MALLEABLE: CENTRAL TO THE OUTCOME OF A TRIAL: GESTMIN CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

MEMORY IS FLUID AND MALLEABLE: CENTRAL TO THE OUTCOME OF A TRIAL: GESTMIN CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Another aspect of the judgment in Walsh v Greystone Financial Services Ltd [2019] EWHC 1719 (Ch)  was the trial depended largely on the judge’s assessment of the evidence of the claimant.  There was reference, unsurprisingly, to Gestmin. “Memory is fluid…

WHEN THE EXPERT WITNESS ACTUALLY SAYS THEY ARE AN "ADVOCATE": WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN?

WHEN THE EXPERT WITNESS ACTUALLY SAYS THEY ARE AN “ADVOCATE”: WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN?

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In LIC Telecommunications SARL & Anor v VTB Capital Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 1747 (Comm)  Mrs Justice Moulder made some telling observations in relation to the expert evidence. THE CASE The application concerned whether certain proceedings were duly authorised….

I DON'T WANT YOUR SOLICITORS TO ACT FOR YOU: CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION REFUSED

I DON’T WANT YOUR SOLICITORS TO ACT FOR YOU: CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION REFUSED

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content

In Glencairn IP Holdings Ltd & Anor v Product Specialities Inc (t/a Final Touch) & Anor [2019] EWHC 1733 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon dismissed the claimant’s application for an injunction to prevent the defendants’ solicitors acting for them. THE CASE The…

"CHARACTER EVIDENCE" IN CIVIL CASES: NOT ALLOWED (AND NOT MUCH USE ANYWAY)

“CHARACTER EVIDENCE” IN CIVIL CASES: NOT ALLOWED (AND NOT MUCH USE ANYWAY)

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Walsh v Greystone Financial Services Ltd [2019] EWHC 1719 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee made some observations about evidence that was, in part, “character evidence”. THE CASE The claimant brought an action seeking damages after being advised to invest in…

PART 36 OFFER WAS NOT AN EFFECTIVE ONE AND DEFENDANT HAD TO PAY COSTS

PART 36 OFFER WAS NOT AN EFFECTIVE ONE AND DEFENDANT HAD TO PAY COSTS

July 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In  Bull v Desporte [2019] EWHC 1669 (QB) Mr Justice Knowles rejected the defendant’s argument that a Part 36 offer meant that she did not have to pay costs. THE CASE The claimant succeeded in an action for misuse of…

LATEST EDITION OF THE GUIDE TO FATAL ACCIDENTS: AVAILABLE NOW

LATEST EDITION OF THE GUIDE TO FATAL ACCIDENTS: AVAILABLE NOW

July 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Fatal Accidents, Members Content

There is, I suppose, no point in having a blog if you can’t tell people about your own books.  The 4th edition of the Guide to Fatal Accidents is out and in (at least one) shop window.  As well as…

BULLYING AT WORK: HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH IT? CONTRIBUTIONS FROM TWITTER

BULLYING AT WORK: HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH IT? CONTRIBUTIONS FROM TWITTER

July 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Members Content, Well being

The earlier post dealt with useful links for dealing with bullying at work. Some people on Twitter also started to contribute. Additional contributions welcome, on Twitter or in the comments section to this blog. Mary Aspinall-Miles‏ A topic that I…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 13 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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A TRIBUTE TO GILES PEAKER: “NEARLY LEGAL” – AN EXTRAORDINARY MAN WITH EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS
  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT
  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE LAW AND PRACTICE: WEBINAR 24th APRIL 2026
  • EXPERT WATCH 43: WHEN AN EXPERT DOESN’T HAVE “REAL WORLD” EXPERIENCE OF THE MATTERS IN THEIR REPORT – THEY START ON THE BACK FOOT…
  • COSTS BITES 377: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEAD TO IT LOSING ITS RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS?

Top Posts

  • A TRIBUTE TO GILES PEAKER: "NEARLY LEGAL" - AN EXTRAORDINARY MAN WITH EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS
  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT'S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT
  • THERE MAY BE A LOT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING A PARTY: HOWEVER THE CLAIM WAS STILL PRESENTED IN AN "UNFOCUSED" MANNER: A "MOVEABLE FEAST" IS NOT A WISE WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?
  • COSTS BITES 377: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEAD TO IT LOSING ITS RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS?

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.