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 » 09
NEARLY LEGAL: JOHNNY DEPP: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER: "EVERY LITIGATION SOLICITOR IN THE COUNTRY SIGHS HEAVILY IN WEARY FAMILIARITY..."

NEARLY LEGAL: JOHNNY DEPP: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER: “EVERY LITIGATION SOLICITOR IN THE COUNTRY SIGHS HEAVILY IN WEARY FAMILIARITY…”

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

A Tweet this evening, followed by a number of comments, causes me to repeat my advice on the necessity of the lawyer protecting themselves when drafting a witness statement on behalf of a client or witness.     NEARLY LEGAL…

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO AMEND CLAIM, OR INTRODUCE NEW EXPERT,  WHERE APPLICATION TO ADJOURN BECAUSE OF COVID ALLOWED

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO AMEND CLAIM, OR INTRODUCE NEW EXPERT, WHERE APPLICATION TO ADJOURN BECAUSE OF COVID ALLOWED

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Members Content

In Ludlow -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust & BMI Healthcare Ltd [2020] EWHC 1720 (QB) Mr Justice Jay allowed an application for an adjournment on the grounds that a trial could not take place remotely.  However, he refused the claimant’s…

CIVIL EVIDENCE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF: WHEN WHO BEARS THE BURDEN CAN HAVE A MAJOR EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF A CASE

CIVIL EVIDENCE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF: WHEN WHO BEARS THE BURDEN CAN HAVE A MAJOR EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF A CASE

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Emmanuel v Avison & Ors [2020] EWHC 1696 (Ch) contains some interesting observations about the burden of proof.  The burden lay with the claimant, despite the fact that if different proceedings had been…

FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS, PART 36 AND "EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES": A CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION

FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS, PART 36 AND “EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES”: A CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to my colleague Erica Bedford for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Godsmark QC in Young -v- AXA Insurance UK Ltd, a copy of which is available here  LN2018-15 Young v AXA Judgment as…

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

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 77: CASE STRUCK OUT: THERE WAS “INSUFFICIENT PLEADINGS OF FACT FROM WHICH IT COULD BE INFERRED THAT ANY OF THE ALLEGATIONS HAVE A REAL PROSPET OF SUCCESS”
  • SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: TIPS FOR TESTIFYING IN COURT: FROM THE UNITED STATE’S ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA)
  • SERVICE POINTS 43: WHY CPR 6.15 IS NOT THE “CAVALRY” COMING OVER THE HILL TO SAVE YOU IF THE CLAIM FORM HAS NOT BEEN SERVED PROPERLY
  • SERVICE POINTS 42: A £82 MILLION POUND FAILS BECAUSE THE CLAIM FORM WAS SENT BY EMAIL TO SOLICITORS WHO HAD NOT STATED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT SERVICE: AN OLD ISSUE (AND A BIG ONE)

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.