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 » November » 11
COST BITES 193: HOW COSTS OF £300,000 COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED: COURT OF APPEAL OBSERVATIONS

COST BITES 193: HOW COSTS OF £300,000 COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED: COURT OF APPEAL OBSERVATIONS

November 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The Court of Appeal judgment in Clapham & Ors v Narga [2024] EWCA Civ 1388 contains important observations about the interaction of the law of adverse possession and the Land Registration Act 2002. However, this being a blog about litigation,…

COST BITES 191: COSTS BILL REDUCED TO NIL BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: "THIS IS THE WORSE EXAMPLE OF TAMPERING WITH A FILE OF PAPERS THAT I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED"

COST BITES 191: COSTS BILL REDUCED TO NIL BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: “THIS IS THE WORSE EXAMPLE OF TAMPERING WITH A FILE OF PAPERS THAT I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED”

November 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Simon Gibbs of GWS Costs for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge James in Kapoor -v- Johal [2024] EWHC 2853 (SCCO).  The judge made findings of serious misconduct by the receiving party…

THE COURT SHOULD HAVE GRANTED AN ADJOURNMENT: APPEAL ALLOWED WHEN NO REASONS GIVEN FOR REFUSING APPLICATION

THE COURT SHOULD HAVE GRANTED AN ADJOURNMENT: APPEAL ALLOWED WHEN NO REASONS GIVEN FOR REFUSING APPLICATION

November 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In EB Pension Fund & Ors v Froggatt [2024] EWHC 2721 (Ch) Mr Nicholas Thompsell (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) allowed an appeal where there had been a refusal to allow an adjournment.  He held that…

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW 7: WITNESS STATEMENTS "ACCURACY AND NOT LEGAL ARGUMENT IS THE KEY TO ENSURING A WITNESS STATEMENT IS AS EFFECTIVE AS IT CAN BE"

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW 7: WITNESS STATEMENTS “ACCURACY AND NOT LEGAL ARGUMENT IS THE KEY TO ENSURING A WITNESS STATEMENT IS AS EFFECTIVE AS IT CAN BE”

November 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

In terms of preparation of client’s case, and prospects of success,  witness statements  are crucial.  The rules only allow the witness to give additional evidence in exceptional circumstances.  Many cases that go to trial are, in essence, about the credibility…

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 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS…)
  • THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
  • EXPERT WATCH 71: “I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE”: THE EXPERT WAS “ADVOCATING” AND “HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
  • MORE ABOUT THE CASE AGAINST A SOLICITOR BEING STRUCK OUT: THE ABSENCE OF AN ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITY MEANT THERE WAS NO CASE: A CLAIMANT CANNOT HOPE THAT “SOMETHING WILL TURN UP” ON DISCLOSURE…

Top Posts

TUPE DOES NOT PASS ON LIABILITIES TO THIRD PARTIES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
EXPERT WATCH 70: EXPERTS' FAILURES TO REPORT ON THE RANGE OF OPINIONS LEADS TO THEIR VIEWS BEING REJECTED: ESSENTIAL READING FOR EVERY PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYER, ANYONE WHO INSTRUCTS AN EXPERT (AND ANY EXPERT...)
THE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AND ONE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: DECISION TO STRIKE OUT ALLOWED ON APPEAL BECAUSE THE JUDGE HAD WRONGLY CONSIDERED THE MERITS
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (2): HOW TO SPOT "FALSE" AUTHORITIES AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT (PLUS SOME USEFUL LINKS)
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (3): AI AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: VERY DANGEROUS BEDFELLOWS: TWENTY KEY POINTS

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.