Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2021 » February » 17
USING PART 8 PROCEEDINGS INSTEAD OF APPEALING IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: A TAXING ISSUE OF SOME INTEREST

USING PART 8 PROCEEDINGS INSTEAD OF APPEALING IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: A TAXING ISSUE OF SOME INTEREST

February 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Members Content

In Revenue And Customs v MCX Dunlin (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 186 the Court of Appeal held that the use of Part 8 proceedings, rather than a statutory route of appeal was an abuse of process. “… it seems…

REPLIES TO DEFENCES: WHY AND WHEN...

REPLIES TO DEFENCES: WHY AND WHEN…

February 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

A post yesterday made me think that this is an opportune time to re-visit the function of the Reply in litigation. I am here concerned only with a Reply to a Defence which is, essentially voluntary, not a Defence to…

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

  • PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 6 : CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE SOLICITORS WERE NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING UPON SETTLEMENT (IN FACT IT FAILS TO PROVE A LOT OF OTHER MATTERS AS WELL…)
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN A SOLICITOR APPLIES TO COME OFF THE RECORD: THE NEED FOR EVIDENCE, NOTICE AND PROOF OF SERVICE
  • COST BITES 450 : SHOULD THE COURT DELAY THE DATE ON WHICH INTEREST ACCRUES ON COSTS? THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS AN INTERESTING QUESTION
  • COST BITES 449: HAD A CLAIMANT BEATEN ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER? IT IT HAD WAS IT UNJUST FOR THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY? MINING THE RULES FOR AN ANSWER…
  • EXPERT WATCH 82: THE PROFOUND DANGERS OF AN EXPERT USING AI: “A SIGNIFICANT GAP BETWEEN THE VOICE AND OPINION OF THE EXPERT AND THE REPORT WHICH SHE HAS FILED”

Top Posts

CLAIMANT'S CLAIM AGAINST INSURER FAILS: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLD DECISION THAT THE INSURED'S FAILURE TO NOTIFY WAS A CONDITION PRECEDENT
"THIS IS NOT THE MANNER IN WHICH AN APPLICATION SHOULD BE MADE": EMAILS TO THE COURT CANNOT TAKE THE PLACE OF APPLICATIONS
EXPERT WATCH 82: THE PROFOUND DANGERS OF AN EXPERT USING AI: "A SIGNIFICANT GAP BETWEEN THE VOICE AND OPINION OF THE EXPERT AND THE REPORT WHICH SHE HAS FILED”
NO FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY WHERE A CLAIMANT GAVE AN ACCOUNT DIFFERENT TO HER LETTER OF CLAIM: (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE)
NON-COMPLIANT CLAIMANTS ARE IN THE LAST CHANCE SALOON (AND THERE ARE 5,000 OF THEM): BUT PARTICULARS MUST BE SERVED AND ADVERSE COSTS STILL PAID

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.