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
Recent Posts
- AN INTERESTING CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: NO INTEREST AWARDED ON DAMAGES FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT
- SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: INTERIM BILLS ARE NOT STATUTE BILLS
- THE DANGER OF CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS: THE DEFENDANT CAN WAIT ONE DAY AND THEN PUT COSTS AT LARGE
- PROVING THINGS 203: EVIDENCE AND SCOTT SCHEDULES IN COERCIVE CONTROL CASES: SCOTT SCHEDULES “INEFFECTIVE AND FREQUENTLY UNSUITABLE”
- ANOTHER WITNESS STATEMENT THAT STRAYED INTO INADMISSIBLE ARGUMENTS, PROTRACTED COMMENTARY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE
Top Posts & Pages
- THE DANGER OF CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS: THE DEFENDANT CAN WAIT ONE DAY AND THEN PUT COSTS AT LARGE
- SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: INTERIM BILLS ARE NOT STATUTE BILLS
- AN INTERESTING CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: NO INTEREST AWARDED ON DAMAGES FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT
- CLAIMANTS SUED THE WRONG (NON-EXISTENT) DEFENDANT - AND THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAD EXPIRED: DON'T START BREAKING THE CROCKERY JUST YET
- PROVING THINGS 203: EVIDENCE AND SCOTT SCHEDULES IN COERCIVE CONTROL CASES: SCOTT SCHEDULES "INEFFECTIVE AND FREQUENTLY UNSUITABLE"
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
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
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy