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 » June » 20
"SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE" AND FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WE'LL KNOW IT WHEN WE SEE IT BUT WE DON'T SEE IT HERE: JUDGE'S DECISION NOT TO IMPOSE USUAL PENALTIES OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

“SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE” AND FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WE’LL KNOW IT WHEN WE SEE IT BUT WE DON’T SEE IT HERE: JUDGE’S DECISION NOT TO IMPOSE USUAL PENALTIES OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

June 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury, Uncategorized

In Woodger v Hallas [2022] EWHC 1561 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles overturned a decision of the Circuit Judge that the usual principles of a finding of fundamental dishonesty should not apply to the claimant.  The judgment involves a consideration…

COSTS, INTEREST ON COSTS AND COSTS ON COSTS: SEE HOW THEY GROW: £65,000 BECOMES £185,000

COSTS, INTEREST ON COSTS AND COSTS ON COSTS: SEE HOW THEY GROW: £65,000 BECOMES £185,000

June 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

There is a short passage in the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in  Blacklion Law LLP v Amira Nature Foods Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1500 (Ch) that shows one of the dangers of…

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT WHEN SIGNING A DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF A CLIENT: A FEW CASES CONSIDERED

THINGS TO THINK ABOUT WHEN SIGNING A DOCUMENT ON BEHALF OF A CLIENT: A FEW CASES CONSIDERED

June 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

It is also useful to issue periodic reminders of the dangers that are involved when a solicitor signs a document on behalf of their client. Here we look at several cases and the rules themselves.   The observations of the…

VERY LATE APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSIONS REFUSED: ADMISSIONS MADE IN REPLY REMAINED BINDING

VERY LATE APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSIONS REFUSED: ADMISSIONS MADE IN REPLY REMAINED BINDING

June 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

I am grateful to John De Waal QC for pointing out the procedural aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Edwin Johnson in Valley View Health Centre (a firm) & Ors v NHS Property Services Ltd [2022] EWHC 1393 (Ch)….

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 12.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A FITTING END TO THE BAYEUX THEMED WEEK: SHOULD FRANCE HAVE JURISDICTION IN THIS CASE? MORE ABOUT LAWYERS USING WITNESS STATEMENTS TO PUT FORWARD LEGAL ARGUMENTS (DO IT IF YOU WILL – BUT IT NEVER HELPS…)
  • COST BITES 451 : INTEREST ON COSTS A RECENT JUDGMENT, A REVIEW OF POSTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR THE RECEIVING PARTY
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 92: THE NEED TO PROVIDE PARTICULARS OF SIGNIFICANT ALLEGATIONS: DEFENDANTS’ (LARGELY) SUCCESSFUL REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION NEEDED BEFORE THEY FILED A DEFENCE
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “OFFICE GOSSIP PROVES NOTHING”: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF” (SEPTEMBER 2016)
  • WHEN CHAT GPT DRAFTED A “SKELETON” ARGUMENT – 300 PAGES AND 132,000 WORDS LONG: THE LITIGANT RETAINS RESPONSIBILITY AND MUST COMPLY WITH THE RULES

Top Posts

WHEN CHAT GPT DRAFTED A "SKELETON" ARGUMENT - 300 PAGES AND 132,000 WORDS LONG: THE LITIGANT RETAINS RESPONSIBILITY AND MUST COMPLY WITH THE RULES
SERVICE POINTS 54: THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN TIME: THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON A DEFENDANT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 7.7: THE ACTION BITES THE DUST
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS "HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS": A USEFUL CHECKLIST AND LINKS TO KEEP YOU ON THE STRAIGHT AND NARROW
ADVISING THE CLIENT OF THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: TEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS COUPLED WITH THE RELEVANT LINKS
COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS' APPLICATIONS TO AMEND AND TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS: A SUBMISSION THAT "WELL WE WERE LYING WHEN WE SIGNED THOSE STATEMENTS OF TRUTH" IS NOT A GOOD STARTING PLACE

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.