Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2020 » June » 01
CIVIL PROCEDURE (CORONAVIRUS): BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP  - MAY 2020

CIVIL PROCEDURE (CORONAVIRUS): BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – MAY 2020

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

Articles and posts of interest to litigators in relation to civil procedure and Coronavirus. THE POSTS Courts Litigation Futures Court issues guidance on e-bundles for short applications Remote Hearings Litigation Futures “Uphill battle” to engage judges in remote JR hearings Litigation Futures ……

NO VARIATION TO COURT ORDER BECAUSE OF CORONOVIRUS: RESPONDENT DOES NOT GET TWO BITES OF THE CHERRY

NO VARIATION TO COURT ORDER BECAUSE OF CORONOVIRUS: RESPONDENT DOES NOT GET TWO BITES OF THE CHERRY

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Coronavirus, Damages, Members Content

It is likely that the Coronavirus epidemic is going to give rise to many issues in litigation.  Some of them unusual and unprecedented.   An example can be seen in the judgment today in Dinglis v Dinglis & Ors [2020] EWHC…

JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: "ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN"

JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: “ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN”

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Last week the “Covid Repeats” posts on this blog highlighted a few (and just a few) of the cases where judges had been critical of the role of experts, or experts involved in cases has been problematic.  That this remains…

CHANGE TO THE SPECIAL ACCOUNT RATE: DOWN TO 0.1%: PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

CHANGE TO THE SPECIAL ACCOUNT RATE: DOWN TO 0.1%: PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Interest, Members Content

This morning the Ministry of Justice announced a reduction of interest rates for the Courts Funds special and basic accounts, effective from today (1st June 2020). THE ANNOUNCEMENT “Due to the impact of Covid-19, the Bank England reduced the base…

COVID REPEATS 39: THE DANGERS OF OBTAINING ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PROBLEM THAT CANNOT BE GARAGED

COVID REPEATS 39: THE DANGERS OF OBTAINING ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PROBLEM THAT CANNOT BE GARAGED

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This week we are looking at past posts and cases on witness statements and witness evidence. This is an area with no shortage of cases to choose from. I have made the point, many times, that witness statements are basically…

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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.