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 » 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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A PRACTICAL AI PRIMER FOR LAWYERS: THE SECOND EDITION OF “ANDREW AND THE MARVELLOUS ANALYTICAL ENGINE”: MAJOR ADDITIONS TO A FAST MOVING AND IMPORTANT AREA
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 7: SECOND ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE A FOREIGN JUDGMENT WAS (AMONG OTHER THINGS) AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
  • LITIGATOR’S LIFELINES 3: WHAT IF YOU HAVE SERVED A SCHEDULE OF COSTS LATE?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “SKELETON ARGUMENTS – DO THEM PROPERLY OR YOU WON’T GET PAID” (NOVEMBER 2014)
  • COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE

Top Posts

FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
YOU CAN'T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN'T ATTEND - BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS ...
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT

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.