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 » July » 02
NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER AND PART 36 BENEFITS APPLIED WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER AND PART 36 BENEFITS APPLIED WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT HIS OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

July 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Scales v Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2020] EWHC 1749 (QB) Mr Justice Cavangh rejected the defendant’s submission that there should be an issue based costs order and awarded a claimant the usual Part 36 benefits when he beat his own…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURES ON DISCLOSURE: THE  DEPP TRIAL IS BACK AFLOAT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURES ON DISCLOSURE: THE DEPP TRIAL IS BACK AFLOAT

July 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

Last week I wrote on the latest episode of the Depp case.  Mr Justice Nicol held that there had been a failure to comply with a peremptory order on disclosure and the Mr Depp’s case stood struck out.  Today it…

WOULD YOU BELIEVE IT? ANOTHER CASE WHEN CLAIM FORM WRONGLY SERVED : CLAIMANT "SERVED" ON SOLICITORS WHO DID NOT HAVE INSTRUCTIONS TO ACCEPT SERVICE

WOULD YOU BELIEVE IT? ANOTHER CASE WHEN CLAIM FORM WRONGLY SERVED : CLAIMANT “SERVED” ON SOLICITORS WHO DID NOT HAVE INSTRUCTIONS TO ACCEPT SERVICE

July 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

In the judgment  in Gallagher v Hallows Associates [2020] EW Misc 7 (CC) HHJ Jarman QC found that a defendant had been wrongly served when it was sent to solicitors who did not state they had instructions to accept service.  This…

WHEN YOU MUST AND WHEN YOU CAN'T SERVE PROCEEDINGS ON THE CLIENT'S SOLICITOR (ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE)

WHEN YOU MUST AND WHEN YOU CAN’T SERVE PROCEEDINGS ON THE CLIENT’S SOLICITOR (ESSENTIAL KNOWLEDGE)

July 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form

The judgment yesterday in Piepenbrock v Associated Newspapers Ltd & Ors  [2020] EWHC 1708 gives rise to that familiar issue of when a party can, and cannot, serve on the defendant’s solicitor.  No apologies are made for repeating the rules here. …

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

  • A NEW SERIES OF USEFUL ONLINE CALCULATORS FOR LITIGATORS AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION (WITH A 20% DISCOUNT FOR CLB READERS): MAKING IT ALL ADD UP
  • COST BITES 404: JUDGE ORDERS DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: PARTIES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH THE PROCESS OF LITIGATION: “THEY SHOULD BE USING NON-COURT BASED DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHEREVER POSSIBLE”
  • THE NEW SRA SUPERVISION GUIDANCE: WHAT LITIGATION FIRMS, AND LITIGATORS, NEED TO DO NOW: WEBINAR 25th JUNE 2025
  • AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS AND PROCEDURAL PROBLEMS – CLB IS PICKING UP THE PACE: LOOKING AT A CASE WHERE EVERYTHING WHEN DISASTROUSLY WRONG PROCEDURALLY – WITH CLEAR GUIDANCE ON HOW TO AVOID THIS GOING FORWARD
  • NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)

Top Posts

DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGES SHOULD BE CAREFUL WHO IS GIVEN THE TASK OF TRYING COMPLEX TRIALS: COURT OF APPEAL MISSIVE TO DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGES (& MANY OTHERS...)
NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES' COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
COST BITES 403: JUDGMENT TODAY: SUCCESS FEE AND ATE PREMIUM NOT PAYABLE BY CLIENT WHEN THE SOLICITOR FAILED TO MAKE REASONABLE ENQUIRIES ABOUT BTE INSURANCE
PROVING THINGS 291: WHAT WEIGHT DOES A JUDGE GIVE TO WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL AND (THE JUDGE FINDS) THERE IS NO GOOD REASON FOR THIS?
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT: HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS: KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS

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.