Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2022 » January » 24
STATEMENTS OF CASE, DRAFTING, DANGERS AND PITFALLS 2022: FORTHCOMING WEBINAR

STATEMENTS OF CASE, DRAFTING, DANGERS AND PITFALLS 2022: FORTHCOMING WEBINAR

January 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Case, Webinar

Recently we have looked at several cases where the importance of proper pleading was emphasises. For instance in Charles Russell Speechlys LLP v Beneficial House (Birmingham) Regeneration LLP [2021] EWHC 3458 (QB) the appeal was allowed, and the matter remitted…

APPLICATIONS TO AMEND: TOWER BLOCKS, FIRE SAFETY AND "FACTS" PLEADED IN THE DEFENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

APPLICATIONS TO AMEND: TOWER BLOCKS, FIRE SAFETY AND “FACTS” PLEADED IN THE DEFENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Mulalley & Co. Ltd v Martlet Homes Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that a claimant, seeking to amend its Particulars of Claim by referring to matters pleaded in the defence, was pleading…

WHAT HAPPENS AT A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COSTS OF A TRIAL? ALSO THE COSTS AND INTEREST THAT FOLLOWS A PART 36 OFFER

WHAT HAPPENS AT A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF THE COSTS OF A TRIAL? ALSO THE COSTS AND INTEREST THAT FOLLOWS A PART 36 OFFER

January 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We have already looked at the judgment of HHJ Pearce (sitting as a High Court Judge) in The Huntsworth Wine Company Ltd v London City Bond Ltd [2022] EWHC 98 in relation to the construction of Part 36 offers.  This was…

A PART 36 OFFER CANNOT BE REDUCED BECAUSE OF A DEDUCTIBLE: AN INSURER IS BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THE OFFER IT MADE

A PART 36 OFFER CANNOT BE REDUCED BECAUSE OF A DEDUCTIBLE: AN INSURER IS BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THE OFFER IT MADE

January 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to solicitor John McQuater for sending me a copy of the decision in Denton -v- Ms Amlin Underwriting (County Court at Doncaster 6th August 2021). It relates to an insurer defendant attempting to deduct an excess figure…

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

  • COST BITES 423: THE JUDGE’S EYEBROWS ARE RAISED AT AN ADDITIONAL £2,500 BECAUSE THE KC HAS TO STAY FOR THE AFTERNOON…
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 4: THE COURT SETS ASIDE A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS MORATORIA AND ALLOWS BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS TO CONTINUE
  • COST BITES 422: THE ORDER FOR INTERIM COSTS IN THE AMY WINEHOUSE CASE : THE JUDGE WAS UNIMPRESSED WITH CLAIMANT’S “WEAK ARGUMENTS TO BOLSTER HIS ALREADY WEAK COSTS SUBMISSIONS”
  • COST BITES 421 : THE AMY WINEHOUSE CASE IS BACK IN COURT: CLAIMANT’S AGGRESSIVE CONDUCT OF A CASE WHERE HE LOST “ON EVERY MATERIAL POINT OF FACT AND LAW” LEADS TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS
  • SERVICE POINTS 51: HIGH COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE AN ORDER ALLOWING SERVICE BY EMAIL ON THE DEFENDANT’S SOLICITORS

Top Posts

COST BITES 419: HOW CLAIMING COUNSEL'S FEES ON AN N260 CAN LEAD TO REFERRAL TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS TO BE CONSIDERED: SIGNATORY BEWARE
LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT...) AND THE COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS "WHAT IS A TRIAL?": THE DEFINITION PROVES TO BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THIS APPELLANT...
COST BITES 421 : THE AMY WINEHOUSE CASE IS BACK IN COURT: CLAIMANT'S AGGRESSIVE CONDUCT OF A CASE WHERE HE LOST "ON EVERY MATERIAL POINT OF FACT AND LAW" LEADS TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS
MAZUR MATTERS 66: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD FINAL REPORT ON MAZUR: "REGULATORY REVIEW OF ADVICE AND GUIDANCE PROVIDED TO THE PROFESSION ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGAITON BY APPROVED REGULATORS AND REGULATORY BODIES"
EXPERT WATCH 63: WHEN A DOCTOR WRITES TO THE COURT AND THE JUDGE FINDS THE INFORMATION "UNRELIABLE"

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.