2 Responses
Comments are closed.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 35.2K other subscribers
Recent Posts
- PART 36: WHAT FACTORS ARE CONSIDERED AS TO INCREASED INTEREST WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN OFFER? THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
- MAZUR MATTERS 6: FURTHER GUIDANCE FROM CILEX: “FIRMS WILL NEED TO SATISFY THEMSELVES THAT THEY ARE COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW”
- PROVING THINGS 271: “THAT IS SIMPLY NOT AN ADEQUATE WAY OF ADVANCING A CLAIM FOR £8 MILLION”:
- PROVING THINGS 270: DEFENDANT FAILS TO PROVE A FAILURE TO MITIGATE LOSS: NO MARKET FOR REJECTED HOSPITAL GOWNS
- SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER (BUT NOT JUST THE PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER: WEBINAR 9th OCTOBER 2025
Top Posts
- MAZUR MATTERS 4: DOES MAZUR COVER ANYTHING PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF PROCEEDINGS? THREE CASES THAT CONSIDER THE ISSUE
- MAZUR MATTERS 5: THE SRA STATEMENT: "WE KNEW THE LAW ALL ALONG" (WITH NO EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THEY GOT IT WRONG)
- MAZUR MATTERS 6: FURTHER GUIDANCE FROM CILEX: "FIRMS WILL NEED TO SATISFY THEMSELVES THAT THEY ARE COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW"
- PROVING THINGS 271: "THAT IS SIMPLY NOT AN ADEQUATE WAY OF ADVANCING A CLAIM FOR £8 MILLION":
- MAZUR MATTERS 3: CILEX MEMBERS - THE REAL VICTIMS OF ALL THIS: WHAT CILEX MEMBERS CAN DO ABOUT THIS
Archives
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
Copyright
© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025.
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
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
Yes I remember 1994 clearly. The automatic direction to strike out a claim if you did not apply for trial was harsh and caused a lot of problems, panic and potential negligence claims.I remember joining a new firm on a Monday and then spending all weekend just going through the litigation files as the previous fee earner had not dealt with it.i was very fortunate as some cases were due to expire in a few days and a few weeks.i saved the firm a lot of money regarding potential negligence claims and don’t think to this day the firm were aware of this. We got very lucky!
Take care
The best thing about those days was that personal injury claims were still a respectable, if rather dull part of the profession. There was none of the rubbish that started with the abolition of legal aid and the introduction of the hideous CFA.
Claims were dealt with on a civil basis, often being settled over a cup of tea with the representative from the insurance company. And, incredible as it may seem to current practitioners, it was quite common for the costs to be resolved at the same time.
The nightmare of firms like Claims Direct, The Accident Group and their thousands of imitators all fighting to get their snouts in the trough, could never have been imagined, neither would the emergence of solicitors acting like spivs, owning car hire companies and medical reports agencies and assisting in manufacturing claims.
In abolishing legal aid for PI claims Lord Woolf spawned an evil monster, which caused 1,000 times as much damage as dodgy legal aid certificates ever did, as well as destroying the credibility of a large part of the legal profession forever.