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 » October » 17
ADVOCACY - THE JUDGE'S VIEW: A REPEAT ii: "USEFUL, JUST & CHEAP": GUIDANCE FROM AUSTRALIA

ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW: A REPEAT ii: “USEFUL, JUST & CHEAP”: GUIDANCE FROM AUSTRALIA

October 17, 2024 · by gexall · in Members Content, Useful links, Written advocacy

The post  I repeated yesterday on Things Lawyers do to Annoy Judges was, without doubt,  when first written one of the most publicised and read posts on this blog. I think it was that post that led to the blog…

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

  • WHICH CITY IS BEST FOR THE TRIAL? A JUDGMENT FROM THE USA AND ITS (IMAGINED) ENGLISH EQUIVALENT: “THE COURT CAN FURTHER REASSURE VISITING PRACTITIONERS THAT THE COURTHOUSE HAS ELECTRIC LIGHTING, INDOOR PLUMBING AND DOORS WHICH OPEN WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE OF A WHIPPET.”
  • COST BITES 451: THE IMPACT OF A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT ON A COSTS BUDGET: THE STATUTE TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER THE CPR: THE DIFFERENCE TO A BUDGET WHEN THE COURT IS COMPELLED TO TAKE THE FINANCIAL POSITION OF THE PARTIES INTO ACCOUNT
  • WHAT YOU SAY (OR DON’T SAY) IN A MEDIATION, AND AFTERWARDS, CAN BE OF CRITICAL IMPORTANCE: COURT SETS ASIDE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND ORDERS REPAYMENT
  • LITIGATOR’S LIFELINES 1: PRUDENT STEPS TO TAKE WHEN ADVISING ON SETTLEMENT: LINKS AND GUIDANCE (FROM THROUGHOUT THE WORLD..)
  • PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 6 : CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE SOLICITORS WERE NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING UPON SETTLEMENT (IN FACT IT FAILS TO PROVE A LOT OF OTHER MATTERS AS WELL…)

Top Posts

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 6 : CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE SOLICITORS WERE NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING UPON SETTLEMENT (IN FACT IT FAILS TO PROVE A LOT OF OTHER MATTERS AS WELL...)
CLAIMANT'S CLAIM AGAINST INSURER FAILS: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLD DECISION THAT THE INSURED'S FAILURE TO NOTIFY WAS A CONDITION PRECEDENT
"THIS IS NOT THE MANNER IN WHICH AN APPLICATION SHOULD BE MADE": EMAILS TO THE COURT CANNOT TAKE THE PLACE OF APPLICATIONS
EXPERT WATCH 82: THE PROFOUND DANGERS OF AN EXPERT USING AI: "A SIGNIFICANT GAP BETWEEN THE VOICE AND OPINION OF THE EXPERT AND THE REPORT WHICH SHE HAS FILED”
NO FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY WHERE A CLAIMANT GAVE AN ACCOUNT DIFFERENT TO HER LETTER OF CLAIM: (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE)

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.