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 » 29
CHILDREN AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION 2024: KEY ISSUES CONSIDERED:  WEBINAR 6th AUGUST

CHILDREN AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION 2024: KEY ISSUES CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 6th AUGUST

July 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Webinar, Well being

There are particulars challenges and difficulties facing a practitioner in cases where children are the only or primary dependants in a fatal claim. This webinar addressed the key issues, in relation to the law, practice and procedure and helping with…

A DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO SEEK TO AVOID SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS: IT WON'T WIN YOU ANY HONOURS BUT IT IS NOT WRONG...

A DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO SEEK TO AVOID SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS: IT WON’T WIN YOU ANY HONOURS BUT IT IS NOT WRONG…

July 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Webinar

In Broom v Aguilar [2024] EWHC 1961 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews rejected an argument that a different costs order should be made because the defendant did not co-operate in relation to service of proceedings upon her.   Seeking to avoid service…

HARASSMENT PROCEEDINGS: PART 7 AND NOT PART 8 SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED

HARASSMENT PROCEEDINGS: PART 7 AND NOT PART 8 SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED

July 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There are often procedural difficulties when a claimant bringing a claim for harassment has to use the Part 8 procedure (as this is prescribed by CPR 65.28(1)(a)).  However as the judgment of Aidan Eardley KC in  Pattinson v Winsor [2024]…

“THE EXTENT OF EVIDENCE… WENT FAR BEYOND THAT PERMITTED BY THE RULES IN RELATION TO EXPERT EVIDENCE”: COMMENTS FROM ANTOTHER JURISDICTION

July 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Education, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

On the rare occasions we look at procedure in jurisdictions outside England and Wales it is often in relation to expert evidence.  Other jurisdictions have similar issues in relation to experts, particularly argumentative experts.  An example can be seen in…

PERSONAL INJURY: EXAGGERATED CLAIMS: CONTEMPT OF COURT: RUGBY, LIFTING WEIGHTS AND... SOCIAL MEDIA

PERSONAL INJURY: EXAGGERATED CLAIMS: CONTEMPT OF COURT: RUGBY, LIFTING WEIGHTS AND… SOCIAL MEDIA

July 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Clinical Negligence, Committal proceedings, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Wye Valley NHS Trust v Murphy [2024] EWHC 1912 (KB) Mr Justice Mould found the defendant in contempt of court for exaggerating the extent of his injuries when bringing a claim for damages for personal injury.  An interesting aspect…

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

  • 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)
  • SERVICE POINTS 56 : PERSONAL SERVICE NOT EFFECTED: COURT RETROSPECTIVELY APPROVES ALTERNATIVE SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS IN CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
  • 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
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: A CASE WHERE THE SOLICITORS’ EVIDENCE (OF THEIR OWN) LOSS WAS “WHOLLY INADEQUATE” (OCTOBER 2017)

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)
SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU...)
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"
CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS, CHANGE OF SOLICITORS AND RATIFICATION AND INFORMED ADVICE: IT IS NOT SO EASY TO SIMPLY RECOMMEND A CHANGE OF SOLICITORS...
COST BITES 466: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ABILITY TO AWARD INTEREST ON COSTS TO LITIGANTS CONDUCTING LITIGATION ON A CFA

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.