Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » 2021 » April » 12

LIABILITY UNDER SOLICITOR’S RETAINER COULD NOT BE ASSIGNED: DEFENDANT OBTAINS SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE ACTION

April 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Summary judgment

In Burleigh House (PTC) Ltd v Irwin Mitchell LLP [2021] EWHC 834 (QB) Deputy Master Hill QC allowed a defendant’s application for summary judgment. The defendant solicitor’s terms and conditions contained a prohibition against the assignment. The current claimant was…

APPLICATIONS TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET: SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS, PROMPTNESS AND CPR 3.15A: A JUDGMENT THAT EVERY CIVIL LITIGATOR HAS TO READ

APPLICATIONS TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET: SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS, PROMPTNESS AND CPR 3.15A: A JUDGMENT THAT EVERY CIVIL LITIGATOR HAS TO READ

April 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In  Persimmon Homes Ltd & Anor v Osborne Clark LLP & Anor [2021] EWHC 831 (Ch) Master Kaye provides a “cut out and keep” guide for anyone involved in attempting to vary a costs budget.  There are important points made…

TIME ESTIMATES FOR APPLICATIONS: THE PROBLEMS, THE CASE LAW AND SOME GUIDANCE

TIME ESTIMATES FOR APPLICATIONS: THE PROBLEMS, THE CASE LAW AND SOME GUIDANCE

April 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The post earlier this morning on the warnings given in Finvest Holdings Sarl -v- Lovering [2021] 3WLUK 579 inrelation to inaccurate time estimates has led to some responses on Twitter.  Practitioners have highlighted the difficulties, a judge expressed their concern that…

INACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES CAN LEAD TO COSTS PENALTIES: A REMINDER

INACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES CAN LEAD TO COSTS PENALTIES: A REMINDER

April 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is another aspect of the judgment in Finvest Holdings Sarl -v- Lovering [2021] 3WLUK 579 HHJ Pelling (sitting as a High Court Judge) that merits examination. The judgment emphasised the need for accurate time estimates. THE CASE The judge…

THE APPROPRIATE STEPS WHEN A JUDGE HAS LIMITED THE SCOPE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS IF YOU WANT TO KEEP A GOOD IMAGE

THE APPROPRIATE STEPS WHEN A JUDGE HAS LIMITED THE SCOPE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS IF YOU WANT TO KEEP A GOOD IMAGE

April 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Another aspect of the judgement of Master Davison in Mustard v Flower & Ors [2021] EWHC 846 (QB) was a decision in relation to expert evidence.  The Master refused the claimant’s application to rely on amended medical reports.   Those reports…

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 16.7K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 35: THE DEFENDANTS’ ARGUMENT THAT THEY COULD RUN A PARTICULAR ARGUMENT ON THE BASIS OF THE CURRENT PLEADINGS WAS “NOTHING MORE THAN WISHFUL THINKING” (OR PERHAPS TANGERINE DREAMING)
  • “LITIGANTS IN PERSON SHOULD BE WARY OF UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WHO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFEND OR PURSUE CASES BY REFERENCE TO SPURIOUS LEGAL ARGUMENTS, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE”
  • THE CLAIMANT RELIED ON A FALSE AUTHORITY: THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE LITIGANT TO CHECK THE CITATION
  • PROVING THINGS 273: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: IT “BEGGARS BELIEF” THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT KNOW OF THE RELEVANT MATTERS
  • MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE

Top Posts

  • PROVING THINGS 273: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: IT "BEGGARS BELIEF" THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT KNOW OF THE RELEVANT MATTERS
  • "LITIGANTS IN PERSON SHOULD BE WARY OF UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WHO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFEND OR PURSUE CASES BY REFERENCE TO SPURIOUS LEGAL ARGUMENTS, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE"
  • THE CLAIMANT RELIED ON A FALSE AUTHORITY: THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE LITIGANT TO CHECK THE CITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 35: THE DEFENDANTS' ARGUMENT THAT THEY COULD RUN A PARTICULAR ARGUMENT ON THE BASIS OF THE CURRENT PLEADINGS WAS "NOTHING MORE THAN WISHFUL THINKING" (OR PERHAPS TANGERINE DREAMING)
  • MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE

Archives

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • 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 National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025. 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 © 2025 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.