Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2024 » July » 03
YOU SIGNED IT - YOU OWN IT: CLAIMANT IN £1.2 MILLION CLAIM FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST AND RECOVERS NOTHING

YOU SIGNED IT – YOU OWN IT: CLAIMANT IN £1.2 MILLION CLAIM FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST AND RECOVERS NOTHING

July 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Matthew Snarr for sending me a copy of the judgments of HHJ Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Shaw -v- Wilde, copies of those judgments are available here shaw-v-wilde-judgment .  I will…

COMPETENCES, CORONERS COURTS AND ADVOCACY:  A REVIEW (AND A USEFUL WEBINAR ON THE 23rd JULY)

COMPETENCES, CORONERS COURTS AND ADVOCACY: A REVIEW (AND A USEFUL WEBINAR ON THE 23rd JULY)

July 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Webinar

In 2021 a working group of legal professionals published a set of Competencies for practitioners working in the Coroners’ Courts, in addition to providing a useful toolkit.  Concerns were raised following the experiences of the families of the victims of…

CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EXAGGERATING SYMPTOMS IS PLAINLY DISHONEST

CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EXAGGERATING SYMPTOMS IS PLAINLY DISHONEST

July 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury, Uncategorized

We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Hamed -v- Ministry of Justice (County Court in Cambridge – 7th June 2024). The judge found that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in the presentation of their symptoms.  This…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM - ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 4: NOW IT IS THE DEFENDANTS THAT HAVE MADE MISTAKES: AN IMPROPERLY SERVED CLAIM FORM IS NOT A NULLITY

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – ERRORS AND PROBLEMS 4: NOW IT IS THE DEFENDANTS THAT HAVE MADE MISTAKES: AN IMPROPERLY SERVED CLAIM FORM IS NOT A NULLITY

July 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form

NB AN APPEAL WAS ALLOWED IN THIS CASE SEE Bellway Homes Ltd v The Occupiers of Samuel Garside House [2025] EWCA Civ 1347 We are continuing with the judgment in Occupiers of Samuel Garside House v Bellway Homes Ltd & Anor [2024]…

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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SOME KEY POINTS ABOUT WITNESS SUMMARIES
  • EXPERT WATCH 80: WHEN EXPERTS ARE ON THE METER: ONE EXPERT WAS NOT ALWAYS INDEPENDENT, THE OTHER DID NOT APPRECIATE HIS DUTY TO THE COURT
  • PERMISSION TO RELY ON A WITNESS SUMMARY: DOES THE APPLICANT NEED TO SHOW THE WITNESS HAS REFUSED TO GIVE A STATEMENT? RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OH, AND THAT WITNESS FORMERLY KNOWN AS “PRINCE”)
  • COST BITES 448: PART 36 AND FIXED COSTS: “VERY LATE” ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT’S OFFER LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING NO COSTS AT ALL
  • COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)

Top Posts

COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
EXPERT WATCH 78 : "ROWING BACK"?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: "THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT"
DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU COULD BE MADE BANKRUPT (OSTENSIBLY ON YOUR OWN APPLICATION), NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT - AND THEN HAVE TO PAY THE TRUSTEE'S COSTS? THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING KEY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT
COST BITES 448: PART 36 AND FIXED COSTS: "VERY LATE" ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT'S OFFER LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING NO COSTS AT ALL
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 101: PUTTING A FIGURE IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DOES NOT NECESSARILY ENTITLE A CLAIMANT TO DEFAULT JUDGMENT FOR THAT SUM

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.