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 » October » 28
THE JUDGMENT IN JALLA -V- SHELL: THE JUDGMENT OF LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL: THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FOR DELAY

THE JUDGMENT IN JALLA -V- SHELL: THE JUDGMENT OF LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL: THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FOR DELAY

October 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The case of Jalla & Anor v Shell International Trading And Shipping Co. Ltd & Anor (Appeal 3: Refusal to Extend Time) [2021] EWCA Civ 1559 was covered in the previous post.  It is worthwhile looking at the shorter judgment…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO EXTEND TIME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER: 28,000 CLAIMS BITE THE DUST

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO EXTEND TIME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER: 28,000 CLAIMS BITE THE DUST

October 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In the decision today in  Jalla & Anor v Shell International Trading And Shipping Co. Ltd & Anor (Appeal 3: Refusal to Extend Time)[2021] EWCA Civ 1559 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to grant extensions of time…

IS A CLUB YARD A "PUBLIC PLACE"? REVERSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO INSURER DEFENDANTS

IS A CLUB YARD A “PUBLIC PLACE”? REVERSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED TO INSURER DEFENDANTS

October 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Brown v Fisk & Ors [2021] EWHC 2769 (QB) Master Dagnall granted reverse summary jugment to an insurer defendant. This involved consideration of whether a yard was a “public place” under s.151 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.   THE…

CLAIMANT WAS VICTIM OF FRAUD BUT ITS ACTION IS STATUTE BARRED: SECTION 32 (1) OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 CONSIDERED

CLAIMANT WAS VICTIM OF FRAUD BUT ITS ACTION IS STATUTE BARRED: SECTION 32 (1) OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 CONSIDERED

October 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content

In European Real Estate Debt Fund (Cayman) Ltd v Treon & Ors [2021] EWHC 2866 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles made many findings adverse to the defendants. However the claim failed because it was statute barred.  The judgment considers the issue…

IN THE RUN UP TO HALLOWEEN 4: THE "TOP 10" THINGS THAT KEEP LAWYERS AWAKE AT NIGHT

IN THE RUN UP TO HALLOWEEN 4: THE “TOP 10” THINGS THAT KEEP LAWYERS AWAKE AT NIGHT

October 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content

Last year I did a Top 10 of lawyer’s nightmares.  The intervening year has not changed much, although there may be more emphasis on the failure of remote hearing platforms… We’ll start with every lawyer’s nightmare.  Alastair David Time limits!!…

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

  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION AN 8 POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE (AUGUST 2019): AND LOOK AT THE LINKS…
  • EXPERT WATCH 66: RED FLAGS AND EXPERTS (1) :THE DUTY TO CONSIDER THE RANGE OF OPINIONS: OFTEN “HONOURED IN THE BREACH”; OFTEN FATAL TO A PARTY’S CASE
  • EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY “WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT” TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
  • ANOTHER INTERESTING DISCUSSION (ABOUT INTEREST…): THE STARTING POINT IS THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR BEING OUT OF ITS MONEY (NO MATTER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE DONE WITH IT…)
  • WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS

Top Posts

EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY "WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT" TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
COST BITES 435: £4 MILLION SPENT IN COSTS AND NEITHER PARTY WILL RECOVER A PENNY FROM THE OTHER: A "PYRHHIC" VICTORY LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS...
COST BITES 436: THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO BEAT THE CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER: WAS IT UNJUST FOR THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY? THE IMPORTANCE OF INTEREST
A WIDOW CANNOT BRING AN ACTION UNDER THE FATAL ACCIDENTS ACT WHERE HER HUSBAND SETTLED THE PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AGAINST A CONCURRENT TORTFEASOR IN HIS LIFETIME
WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS

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.