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 » 31
HIGH COURT JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY DEFENDANT'S COSTS

HIGH COURT JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY DEFENDANT’S COSTS

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

In Pegg v Webb & Anor [2020] EWHC 2095 (QB) tMr Justice Spencer overturned a finding of a trial judge that a claimant had not been fundamentally dishonest.  The claimant had been dishonest in the failures to give full disclosure…

USING RTA PROTOCOL AND PART 8 PROCEDURE INAPPROPRIATELY DID NOT LEAD TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

USING RTA PROTOCOL AND PART 8 PROCEDURE INAPPROPRIATELY DID NOT LEAD TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Members Content, Striking out

The Court of Appeal today gave judgment in Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1015 and overturned the decision to strike out an action because it had been issued inappropriately using the portal and Part 8…

HEARINGS AND DETAILED ASSESSMENTS IN THE SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE PRACTICE NOTE BY THE SENIOR COSTS JUDGE

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Coronavirus, Costs, Members Content

Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker has issued a Practice Note in relation to Practice in the Senior Courts Costs Office.   “Introduction 1. As a result of the hard work and determination of the court staff and the willingness to adapt…

THE NEW PRECEDENT T: SEE IT HERE: A MODEL OF ITS KIND...

THE NEW PRECEDENT T: SEE IT HERE: A MODEL OF ITS KIND…

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am grateful to Sean Linley for sending me a copy of the new Precedent T that will apply to amended budgets after the 1st October 2020.   You can see it here.  Precedent T Example   THE NEW RULES…

AMENDING PLEADINGS? HAVE A DRAFT AT COURT: JUDGE CONSIDERS "CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS" AND A "PARTICULARLY UNFORTUNATE PROCEDURAL LITIGATION HISTORY"

AMENDING PLEADINGS? HAVE A DRAFT AT COURT: JUDGE CONSIDERS “CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS” AND A “PARTICULARLY UNFORTUNATE PROCEDURAL LITIGATION HISTORY”

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content

The judgment of HHJ Gore QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Sivaji v Ministry of Defence [2020] EWHC 2006 (QB) makes interesting reading. It is an object lesson in the need to have an amended pleading to hand…

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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS’ BILLS
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”

Top Posts

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS' BILLS
  • SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES IN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 2: THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS!)
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 59: UNQUALIFIED PERSON NOT ALLOWED TO REPRESENT PARKING COMPANY AT A SMALL CLAIMS HEARING

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.