Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2025 » February
A QUICK POST ABOUT BUNDLES: THIS WAS "ALMOST UNUSABLE": "THE INDEX MUST IDENTIFY THE DOCUMENTS CONTAINED"

A QUICK POST ABOUT BUNDLES: THIS WAS “ALMOST UNUSABLE”: “THE INDEX MUST IDENTIFY THE DOCUMENTS CONTAINED”

February 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Members Content

There is an interesting postscript to the judgment of Judge Anthony Snelson in the case of  Soor v Luton Borough Council [2025] UKFTT 259 (GRC). It relates to bundles… … the bundle produced by the Council (over 600 pages long)…

THE DUTY OF FAIR PRESENTATION AT WITHOUT NOTICE HEARINGS: FREEZING ORDER TURNED INTO SLUSH...

THE DUTY OF FAIR PRESENTATION AT WITHOUT NOTICE HEARINGS: FREEZING ORDER TURNED INTO SLUSH…

February 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

 In J&J Snack Foods Corporation & Anor v Ralph Peters & Sons Limited & Anor [2025] EWHC 436 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt set aside an injunction that had been obtained without notice. The case is an object lesson in the need…

COST BITES 219:  DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER'S FEE? THE COURT MUST "HAVE REGARD TO THE MARKET"

COST BITES 219: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? THE COURT MUST “HAVE REGARD TO THE MARKET”

February 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In  Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau  ( The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025,available here Santiago v MIB Final)*  HHJ Dight CBE considered the issue of what was a reasonable and proportional interpreter’s fee.  The case had been…

FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AT TRIAL OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS WRONG TO RELY ON AN INJURY THAT DID NOT FORM PART OF THE CLAIMANT'S PLEADED CASE

FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AT TRIAL OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS WRONG TO RELY ON AN INJURY THAT DID NOT FORM PART OF THE CLAIMANT’S PLEADED CASE

February 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Express Solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHK Baddeley in Robinson -v- UK Insurance Limited, a note that  case and of the judgment is available here -Robinson word . HHJ Baddeley was…

INTERIM PAYMENTS WHERE ONLY 50% OF DAMAGES ARE LIKELY TO BE RECOVERED: IS A HEAD OF FUTURE LOSS LIKELY TO BE CAPITALISED?

INTERIM PAYMENTS WHERE ONLY 50% OF DAMAGES ARE LIKELY TO BE RECOVERED: IS A HEAD OF FUTURE LOSS LIKELY TO BE CAPITALISED?

February 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Interim Payments, Members Content

In Lexi-Rae Speirs v St Georges University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2025] EWHC 337 (KB) Senior Master Cook considered the question of how the court should approach an application for an interim payment in a case where the claimant was only…

APPLICATIONS FOR ANONYMITY ORDERS IN CIVIL CASES INVOLVING CHILDREN: COURT OF APPEAL ADJOURNS HEARING - BUT WHERE ARE WE NOW?

APPLICATIONS FOR ANONYMITY ORDERS IN CIVIL CASES INVOLVING CHILDREN: COURT OF APPEAL ADJOURNS HEARING – BUT WHERE ARE WE NOW?

February 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Members Content

In PMC (a child) v A Local Health Board [2025] EWCA Civ 176 the Court of Appeal adjourned a hearing relating to anonymity orders in civil cases involving children, pending a Supreme Court decision.  Some important guidance was given as…

AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH EXPERT WITNESSES: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2025: DEALS WITH SOME "INTERESTING" ISSUES: EXPERTS BEHAVING BADLY

AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH EXPERT WITNESSES: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2025: DEALS WITH SOME “INTERESTING” ISSUES: EXPERTS BEHAVING BADLY

February 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

This webinar deals, among other things, with three cases where solicitors have been struck off the Roll because of their conduct with expert witnesses. In one of those cases the solicitor also went to prison. The Court of Appeal held…

SENSIBLE STEPS TO TAKE WHEN THERE IS NO TRANSCRIPT OF A HEARING AVAILABLE

SENSIBLE STEPS TO TAKE WHEN THERE IS NO TRANSCRIPT OF A HEARING AVAILABLE

February 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

A very short passage in the judgment of  Mr Justice Fancourt in Odhavji v Tighe & Ors [2025] EWHC 372 (Ch) sets out the steps a prudent party should take when a transcript (and sometimes a judgment) cannot be obtained. …

PROVING THINGS 255: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE IT HAS SUFFERED ANY LOSS AT ALL:  THERE WAS NO GRIST TO THIS MILL

PROVING THINGS 255: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE IT HAS SUFFERED ANY LOSS AT ALL: THERE WAS NO GRIST TO THIS MILL

February 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

In Trident House Development Limited v Mohammed Yousaf [2025] EWHC 344 (Ch)  HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that a claimant had failed to establish it had suffered any loss at all in its claim for damages against the…

DOES A PROPOSED NEW DEFENDANT HAVE TO BE GIVEN NOTICE OF THE APPLICATION TO JOIN THEM INTO THE ACTION? TWO CONTRASTING VIEWS FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL

DOES A PROPOSED NEW DEFENDANT HAVE TO BE GIVEN NOTICE OF THE APPLICATION TO JOIN THEM INTO THE ACTION? TWO CONTRASTING VIEWS FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Noel Anthony Clarke v Guardian News & Media Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 164 the Court of Appeal considered (but did not determine) the question of whether it was mandatory to give notice of the application to join a new defendant to…

A WITNESS STATEMENT IS FOR EVIDENCE AND NOT SUBMISSIONS (SOMETHING THIS BLOG HAS OBSERVED MANY TIMES IN THE PAST...)

A WITNESS STATEMENT IS FOR EVIDENCE AND NOT SUBMISSIONS (SOMETHING THIS BLOG HAS OBSERVED MANY TIMES IN THE PAST…)

February 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

We are returning to the judgment of Senior Master Cook in  Lexi-Rae Speirs v St Georges University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2025] EWHC 337 (KB).  The Master observed that the witness evidence served in support of the claimant’s application went…

A PARTY CAN'T REALLY OBJECT THAT EVIDENCE IN RESPONSE IS SERVED LATE: WHEN THIS INVOLVES THE RESPONSE BEING SERVED BEFORE THE EVIDENCE IS RECEIVED...

A PARTY CAN’T REALLY OBJECT THAT EVIDENCE IN RESPONSE IS SERVED LATE: WHEN THIS INVOLVES THE RESPONSE BEING SERVED BEFORE THE EVIDENCE IS RECEIVED…

February 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Interim Payments, Members Content

In  Lexi-Rae Speirs v St Georges University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2025] EWHC 337 (KB) Senior Master Cook considered an argument that the defendant’s evidence should not be admitted because it was served late.  The fundamental problem with the claimant’s submission…

AVOIDING PITFALLS WITH WITNESS STATEMENTS - HOW TO DRAFT AN EFFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENT: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2025

AVOIDING PITFALLS WITH WITNESS STATEMENTS – HOW TO DRAFT AN EFFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENT: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2025

February 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Judges regularly complain that witness statements are inadequate and do not contain sufficient information, alternatively that they contain much information that is irrelevant and the witness is unable to give. This webinar is designed to help practitioners avoid the major…

CONTENTS OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AND DOCUMENTS IN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL GIVE RISE TO A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT

CONTENTS OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AND DOCUMENTS IN EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL GIVE RISE TO A PRIMA FACIE CASE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT

February 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Witness statements

In Commerzbank Ag v Ajao [2024] EWHC 3168 (KB) Ms Justice Eady gave permission to bring committal proceedings on the basis of evidence that had been used before the Employment Tribunal.  The case is a reminder that making witness statements,…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING

February 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

In A Father v A Mother [2025] EWHC 364 (Fam) Ms H Markham KC, sitting as Deputy High Court judge, made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The solicitors had failed to take steps to ensure that…

COST BITES 218: JUNIOR COUNSEL'S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE IN PRIVY COUNCIL CASE WHERE THE CFA WAS NOT LAWFUL

COST BITES 218: JUNIOR COUNSEL’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE IN PRIVY COUNCIL CASE WHERE THE CFA WAS NOT LAWFUL

February 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Andrew Roy KC  for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge Rowley in Ruhumatally v The State of Mauritius & Anor, a copy of the judgment is available here  Ruhumatally – reasons.  The…

EMAIL SERVICE ON SOLICITORS THAT HAD ACTED IN OTHER PROCEEDINGS WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE

EMAIL SERVICE ON SOLICITORS THAT HAD ACTED IN OTHER PROCEEDINGS WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE

February 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Kostakopoulou v University of Warwick & Ors [2025] EWHC 342 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne considered issues relating to service of the defendants by email.  He held that, in the absence of express consent to accept proceedings by email in…

THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW OF LIMITATION AND CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: DOES THIS GIVE RISE TO A PRACTICAL PROBLEM FOR PRACTITIONERS AND VICTIMS?

THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LAW OF LIMITATION AND CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE: DOES THIS GIVE RISE TO A PRACTICAL PROBLEM FOR PRACTITIONERS AND VICTIMS?

February 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury, Useful links, Webinar

In a webinar on limitation tomorrow I am considering, among many other issues, the government’s proposals on changes to limitation in child sexual abuse cases. In particular whether there is a practical dilemma for practitioners with actions that are pending. …

CPR 11 AND THE PRINCIPLES IN HODDINOTT DO NOT APPLY IN A CASE WHERE THE COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION AT ALL: AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT

CPR 11 AND THE PRINCIPLES IN HODDINOTT DO NOT APPLY IN A CASE WHERE THE COURT HAS NO JURISDICTION AT ALL: AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT

February 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Sanctions, Striking out

I am grateful to Elliot Gold, barrister,  for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Bloom in Davidson -v- The London Centre of Psychodrama, a copy of which is available here  DavidsonJudgment.       The judge, among other…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE MEANING OF "LAST KNOWN RESIDENCE" AND "REASONABLE STEPS" TO ASCERTAIN A CURRENT RESIDENCE

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE MEANING OF “LAST KNOWN RESIDENCE” AND “REASONABLE STEPS” TO ASCERTAIN A CURRENT RESIDENCE

February 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The question of service of the claim form and  “last known residence”  has  featured already  on this blog this year.  There is another case on the issue in the judgment of Mr Justice Bryan in  Agrofirma Oniks LLC & Anor…

AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND MAKING AN EFFECTIVE SECTION 33 APPLICATION: WEBINAR 20th FEBRUARY 2025

AVOIDING LIMITATION PROBLEMS AND MAKING AN EFFECTIVE SECTION 33 APPLICATION: WEBINAR 20th FEBRUARY 2025

February 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Limitation issues feature regularly on this blog and are a major reason for litigators being sued.  This webinar looks at the major problem areas in limitation for personal injury and clinical negligence litigators. It identifies, and helps litigators avoid, all…

THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE

THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE

February 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Injunctions, Members Content

The judgment of HHJ Halliwell, sitting as a High Court Judge, in  Bootle v GHL Property Management and Development Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 317 (Ch) provides an object lesson on the dangers of over-hasty applications for an injunction.   It…

IT WAS NOT “UNJUST” FOR THE NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY: THE EXISTENCE OF A MAIN CLAIM (WHICH DID NOT SUCCEED) COULD NOT ASSIST THE DEFENDANT

February 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In  South Bank Hotel Management Company Ltd v Galliard Hotels Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 3544 (Ch) Mr Justice Richards considered the arguments as whether it was “unjust” for the normal provisions of a Part 36 offer to apply.  He…

SERVICE ON A SOLICITOR WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE: A PARTY DOES NOT NECESSARILY ACCEPT SOLICITOR SERVICE FOR ALL PURPOSES

SERVICE ON A SOLICITOR WAS NOT GOOD SERVICE: A PARTY DOES NOT NECESSARILY ACCEPT SOLICITOR SERVICE FOR ALL PURPOSES

February 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Deutsche Bank AG v Sebastian Holdings Inc & Anor [2025] EWHC 283 (Comm)  Mrs Justice Cockerill found that an application had not been properly served. The applicant had served the respondent on solicitors who had acted for him in…

THE COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: ACTION AGAINST THAT DEFENDANT DISMISSED

THE COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: ACTION AGAINST THAT DEFENDANT DISMISSED

February 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

One of the issues considered by Mrs Justice Bacon in Vauxhall Motors Ltd & Ors v Denso Automotive UK Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 213 (Ch) was whether an order extending time for service of the claim form should be…

AVOIDING PROCEDURAL ERRORS IN CIVIL LITIGATION (AND WHAT TO DO IF THINGS GO AWRY) : WEBINAR 17th FEBRUARY 2025

AVOIDING PROCEDURAL ERRORS IN CIVIL LITIGATION (AND WHAT TO DO IF THINGS GO AWRY) : WEBINAR 17th FEBRUARY 2025

February 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Webinar, Witness statements

This webinar looks at common mistakes in personal injury litigation and recent cases where things have gone wrong. It then looks at how mistakes can be rectified and how to make an application for relief from sanctions.  Booking details are…

COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS' COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS "ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE"

COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS’ COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS “ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE”

February 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Conduct, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC), looked in the previous post.  Because of the nature of the budget that the…

COST BITES 216: THIS IS A CASE OF HIGH VALUE: HOWEVER THE CLAIMANTS' COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AND THE HOURLY RATES ARE EXCESSIVE

COST BITES 216: THIS IS A CASE OF HIGH VALUE: HOWEVER THE CLAIMANTS’ COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AND THE HOURLY RATES ARE EXCESSIVE

February 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

This is the first of two posts looking at the  costs budgeting judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC).   The judge made observations in…

THE IMPORTANCE OF ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES: THE COURT COULD APPLY SANCTIONS "POUR ENCOURAGER LES AUTRES"

THE IMPORTANCE OF ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES: THE COURT COULD APPLY SANCTIONS “POUR ENCOURAGER LES AUTRES”

February 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are considering the issue of adequate time estimates for the second time this year. We are also revisiting the judgment of Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC in  Christodoulides v CP Christou LLP [2025] EWHC 214 (SCCO), however this time on…

EXPERTS AT TRIAL: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WITH DIRECT PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF THE ISSUE BEING CONSIDERED

EXPERTS AT TRIAL: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WITH DIRECT PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF THE ISSUE BEING CONSIDERED

February 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Dobson v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police [2025] EWHC 272 (KB) HHJ Bird (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered which expert should be accepted in the context of a case against the police.  He preferred the expert with…

COST BITES 215: NON-COMPLIANT POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT - BUT THE COMPLIANT PARTS REMAIN.

COST BITES 215: NON-COMPLIANT POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT – BUT THE COMPLIANT PARTS REMAIN.

February 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Members Content, Striking out

In Christodoulides v CP Christou LLP [2025] EWHC 214 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered the appropriate approach were part of the Points of Dispute to a bill of costs were non-compliant. He held that the appropriate course of…

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 14th FEBRUARY 2025

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 14th FEBRUARY 2025

February 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

Expert evidence plays a critical, often decisive, role in clinical negligence litigation. An ability to assess expert evidence is a key part of the litigator’s role.  This webinar looks at the rules and cases that govern the credibility of expert…

THE COURT DOES NOT HAVE POWER TO STRIKE OUT AN ORDER FOR AN ACCOUNT: AN APPLICATION THAT WAS "ILL JUDGED" AND "PUT FORWARD UNDER A JURISDICTION WHICH THE COURT PLAINLY DOES NOT HAVE"

THE COURT DOES NOT HAVE POWER TO STRIKE OUT AN ORDER FOR AN ACCOUNT: AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “ILL JUDGED” AND “PUT FORWARD UNDER A JURISDICTION WHICH THE COURT PLAINLY DOES NOT HAVE”

February 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

In  Hubbard & Anor v Hubbard & Anor [2024] EWHC 3123 (Ch) Master Marsh (sitting in retirement) rejected a defendant’s application to strike out a claim for an account and for summary judgment for the defendant.  The court had no…

COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED

COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED

February 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Zavorotnii v Malinowski [2025] EWHC 260 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith considered the arguments as to whether a major reduction in a party’s costs budget should lead to an order for costs being made, rather than an order for costs…

THIS CASE IS STAYING IN LONDON: (IT TOOK FROM 2ND JULY  2024 TO 14TH JANUARY 2025 FOR SUBMISSIONS TO BE PLACED BEFORE A JUDGE)

THIS CASE IS STAYING IN LONDON: (IT TOOK FROM 2ND JULY 2024 TO 14TH JANUARY 2025 FOR SUBMISSIONS TO BE PLACED BEFORE A JUDGE)

February 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Since I wrote about a decision transferring Administrative Court proceedings to Leeds it is appropriate that we look at a decision today ordering that the proceedings stay in London despite it having closer ties to Manchester.  In Weis, R (On…

AN UNUSUAL SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASE: COURT GRANTS AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE CORONER

AN UNUSUAL SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASE: COURT GRANTS AN EXTENSION OF TIME IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE CORONER

February 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Sanctions, Service of the claim form

In Whittle v HM Coroner for North West Wales [2025] EWHC 236 (Admin) the Administrative Court dealt with an issue relating to failure to serve the claim form in time.  The Court found a solution.  However the judgment is important…

THIS ACTION IS GOING TO YORKSHIRE: CHOICE OF LONDON LAWYERS DOES NOT DRIVE CHOICE OF VENUE

THIS ACTION IS GOING TO YORKSHIRE: CHOICE OF LONDON LAWYERS DOES NOT DRIVE CHOICE OF VENUE

February 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In SK Enterprises (UK) Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Re Determination as to Venue) [2025] EWHC 237 (Admin) Mrs Justice Hill held that an action in the Administrative Court should be…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND "WITHOUT PREJUDICE" CORRESPONDENCE: JUDGE HOLDS THAT CLAIMANT'S OFFER OF SETTLEMENT WAS ADMISSIBLE

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND “WITHOUT PREJUDICE” CORRESPONDENCE: JUDGE HOLDS THAT CLAIMANT’S OFFER OF SETTLEMENT WAS ADMISSIBLE

February 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In  Morris v Williams [2025] EWHC 218 (KB) District Judge Dodsworth considered the question of whether a letter from the claimant’s former solicitor, which contained proposals by the claimant to settle allegations of fundamental dishonesty, could be adduced as evidence. …

DENTON DID NOT APPLY TO THE DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME: HOWEVER - CONSIDERING THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE - THE APPLICATION WAS REFUSED

DENTON DID NOT APPLY TO THE DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME: HOWEVER – CONSIDERING THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE – THE APPLICATION WAS REFUSED

February 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Bailey & Ors v GlaxoSmithKline UK Ltd [2025] EWHC 186 (KB) Mr Justice Bourne considered whether the defendant should have an extension of time.  The judge considered whether the “Denton” principles apply to the defendant’s application and if not…

CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE - BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE

CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE – BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE

February 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to Professor Keith Rix for allowing me to use an article that appears in February’s Expert Healthcare Witness Matters*.  This deals with the question of whether an expert can, or should, agree to act on a conditional…

COSTS BITES 214: LAWYERS DO YOU WANT TO WORK FOR NOTHING? THE DEFENDANTS' DAMAGE BASED AGREEMENTS WERE NOT VALID AND COSTS WERE NOT RECOVERABLE UNDER A COSTS ORDER: WHY SOLICITORS NEED TO THINK ABOUT THEIR RETAINERS CAREFULLY

COSTS BITES 214: LAWYERS DO YOU WANT TO WORK FOR NOTHING? THE DEFENDANTS’ DAMAGE BASED AGREEMENTS WERE NOT VALID AND COSTS WERE NOT RECOVERABLE UNDER A COSTS ORDER: WHY SOLICITORS NEED TO THINK ABOUT THEIR RETAINERS CAREFULLY

February 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Members Content

If ever there was a case that highlighted the need for solicitors to consider the terms of the retainer with care, and know the law relating to Damages Based Agreements in detail, it is the judgment of Costs Judge Brown…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE CORRECT ADDRESS ON THE ENVELOPE AND THE "LAST KNOWN RESIDENCE" CONSIDERED BY THE HIGH COURT

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE CORRECT ADDRESS ON THE ENVELOPE AND THE “LAST KNOWN RESIDENCE” CONSIDERED BY THE HIGH COURT

February 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Xenfin Fund 1 Trading Ltd v GFG Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 172 (Ch) Joanna Wicks KC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered two issues relating to service of the claim form. Firstly whether a slightly wrong…

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

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)

Top Posts

  • COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF "COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS": THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 2: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PD57AC: "HE KNOWS NOT OF WHAT HE SPEAKS"

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.