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 » May » 19
THE CITATION OF FALSE AUTHORITIES: THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES HAVE A DATE IN COURT ON THE 23rd MAY

THE CITATION OF FALSE AUTHORITIES: THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES HAVE A DATE IN COURT ON THE 23rd MAY

May 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

I have written several times about the remarkable decision in  Frederick Ayinde, R (on the application of) v The London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1040 (Admin) where false authorities were presented to the court.  I have also written about …

COST BITES 238: WHEN A CLIENT DISPUTES THE SOLICITOR'S COSTS: THE JUDGE'S VIEW ON MEMORY, WITNESSES AND STATEMENTS DRAFTED "WITH THE GUIDING HAND OF THE CLAIMANTS' SOLICITOR"

COST BITES 238: WHEN A CLIENT DISPUTES THE SOLICITOR’S COSTS: THE JUDGE’S VIEW ON MEMORY, WITNESSES AND STATEMENTS DRAFTED “WITH THE GUIDING HAND OF THE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITOR”

May 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

Today we are looking at part of a judgment about costs.  Ten claimants had been selected (out of 223) to give evidence challenging a solicitor’s deduction of success fees. In fact only four of the claimants attended court to give…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 4: THE EMPLOYER WAS IN BREACH OF DUTY WHEN EMPLOYEE WAS INJURED CROSSING THE ROAD

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 4: THE EMPLOYER WAS IN BREACH OF DUTY WHEN EMPLOYEE WAS INJURED CROSSING THE ROAD

May 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

Last week we looked at a  case where someone was injured in their workplace, but there was no breach.  Today we are looking a case where an employee was injured crossing the road and it was held that the employer…

CLAIM WAS (ARGUABLY) ISSUED IN TIME WHEN IT ARRIVED AT THE COURT: LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DOES NOT DEPRIVE THE COURT OF JURISDICTION

CLAIM WAS (ARGUABLY) ISSUED IN TIME WHEN IT ARRIVED AT THE COURT: LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DOES NOT DEPRIVE THE COURT OF JURISDICTION

May 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Jurisdiction,, Limitation, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Today we are looking at a case that raises important issues.  The judge decided that calling someone gay is not defamatory. However here we are not concerned with the substantive issues but two procedural issues raised in the case. Firstly…

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

  • EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
  • EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN
  • PERSONAL INJURY MATTERS 17 (1): LIABILITY CATCHUP (1): PUB OPERATOR IS NOT VICARIOUSLY LIABLE FOR DOORMEN’S ACTS: A CONCLUSION REACHED “WITH REGRET”
  • COST BITES 411: HOW DOES A COURT DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF AN INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS WHEN THE CASE HAS NOT BEEN BUDGETED? SHOULD A PAYMENT BE ORDERED AT ALL?
  • COST BITES 410: A CLAIMANT’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES RELATING TO ISSUE AND PLEADING CANNOT BE USED AS A GROUNDS FOR REDUCING ITS RECOVERABLE COSTS

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

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.