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 » April » 17
THE DENTON PRINCIPLES AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL (AGAIN): DELAYS REQUIRE AN EXPLANATION - NOT A CHRONOLOGY

THE DENTON PRINCIPLES AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL (AGAIN): DELAYS REQUIRE AN EXPLANATION – NOT A CHRONOLOGY

April 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Khan & Anor v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWHC 969 (Admin) is the second example this week of the court considering the Denton principles when…

RECENT CASES ON LOSS OF EARNINGS: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 23rd APRIL 2025

RECENT CASES ON LOSS OF EARNINGS: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 23rd APRIL 2025

April 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Practitioners can learn a lot from looking at judgments on claims for loss of earnings.  These provide a practical grounding of how the courts approach such claims and, in particular, how judges consider the evidence (or absence of evidence) in…

EXPERT REPORTS AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED IN THE COURTS AGAIN: LEADS TO A DOCTOR BEING ERASED FROM THE REGISTER OF DOCTORS

EXPERT REPORTS AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED IN THE COURTS AGAIN: LEADS TO A DOCTOR BEING ERASED FROM THE REGISTER OF DOCTORS

April 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment in Moodliar v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 913 (Admin) provides a salutary reminder to medical experts that giving expert evidence is a highly significant task.  Failures in the process can lead to erasure from the medical register,…

THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL: A "NUANCED APPROACH" IS REQUIRED

THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL: A “NUANCED APPROACH” IS REQUIRED

April 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Yaxley-Lennon v HM Solicitor General [2025] EWCA Civ 476 the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in the context of extending time for permission to appeal.   The case emphasises that the absence of a good reason for default…

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

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS’S OWN WORDS?
  • FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: A TALE OF THREE CITIES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE APPEAL WAS LATE BUT THE SOLICITORS “DID NOTHING WRONG AT ALL”
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE “INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED”
  • COST BITES 381: DOES THE COURT HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN RELATION TO AN ASSESSMENT? SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT ALONG THE WAY…
  • SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)

Top Posts

  • SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)
  • COST BITES 380: "ALWAYS CHOOSE A COSTS LAWYER FOR EXPERT LEGAL COSTS ADVICE": GUIDANCE FROM THE SRA
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS'S OWN WORDS?
  • EXPERT WATCH 45: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WHO HAD KNOWLEDGE AND "GENUINE EXPERIENCE IN THE SUBJECT AREA"
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE "INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED"

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.