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 » September » 02
DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO CHALLENGE COSTS PROVISIONS REFUSED: 21 DAYS WAS A SERIOUS AND SIGNIFICANT BREACH AND THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON FOR IT

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO CHALLENGE COSTS PROVISIONS REFUSED: 21 DAYS WAS A SERIOUS AND SIGNIFICANT BREACH AND THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON FOR IT

September 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at a case where the court refused the defendant’s application to extend time when the defendant wanted to challenge the argument that costs were capped.  It was held that the defendant’s delay of 21 days was…

ATTENDANCE NOTES IN CIVIL LITIGATION 2025: WEBINAR 15th SEPTEMBER 2025

ATTENDANCE NOTES IN CIVIL LITIGATION 2025: WEBINAR 15th SEPTEMBER 2025

September 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar

There have been at least three cases over the previous few months where attendance notes taken by solicitors have played a significant part in the outcome of a case, appeal or application.  These notes protected a solicitor against complaints of…

COST BITES 278: HOURLY RATES OF £685(GRADE A) AND £420 (GRADE C) ALLOWED: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT IN ACTION

COST BITES 278: HOURLY RATES OF £685(GRADE A) AND £420 (GRADE C) ALLOWED: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT IN ACTION

September 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

One of the aims of this series is to look at how costs awards are being made in practice.  What is happening “on the ground” is important, if not essential,  knowledge for working litigators. Here we look at a summary…

COST BITES 277: WHEN A CLIENT CHALLENGES A SOLICITOR'S BILL BUT IS OUTSIDE THE TIME PERIODS FOR CHALLENGE IN THE SOLICITORS ACT: THE RESIDUAL ISSUE OF COSTS BEING REASONABLE AND THE COMMON LAW ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 277: WHEN A CLIENT CHALLENGES A SOLICITOR’S BILL BUT IS OUTSIDE THE TIME PERIODS FOR CHALLENGE IN THE SOLICITORS ACT: THE RESIDUAL ISSUE OF COSTS BEING REASONABLE AND THE COMMON LAW ASSESSMENT

September 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at a case that reminds us that a client’s ability to challenge the reasonableness of solicitor’s costs can go outside the Solicitors Act.  Even when the time for challenging the bill has passed the court can…

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

  • YOU CAN’T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN’T ATTEND – BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS …
  • PROVING THINGS 305 : DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH ANY BREACHES AND (IN ANY EVENT) HAD MADE A PROFIT HERE NOT A LOSS: IF YOU PLEAD DAMAGES YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVE THEM
  • SERVICE POINTS 59: AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO SERVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DID NOT EXTEND TIME FOR THE CLAIM FORM: NEITHER DID THE ACTUAL STRIKING OUT OF THE ACTION…
  • THERE HAS NOT BEEN FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: THE DIFFICULTIES WHEN LITIGATION SPANS SEVERAL JURISDICTIONS: “THE SUPPOSED EXPLANATIONS BELATEDLY OFFERED … AMOUNT TO LITTLE MORE THAN AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE FAILING WITH A RATHER LAME CONFESSION OF INABILITY TO EXPLAIN HOW OR WHY IT OCCURRED”
  • MI5: CONTEMPT OF COURT AND THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTERNAL REPORTS: THEY ARE ADMISSIBLE BUT CANNOT BE USED TO PROVE ANYTHING: A POINT OF GENERAL RELEVANCE NOT JUST SECRET AGENTS…

Top Posts

FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
WRITING LETTERS TO THE JUDGE AFTER A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS CIRCULATED: "THIS IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE CONDUCT OF SOLICITORS CONDUCTING LITIGATION AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET"
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
YOU CAN'T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN'T ATTEND - BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS ...
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT

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.