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 » 11
SERVICE POINTS 8: APPLICANT FAILS TO SERVE THE SECRETARY OF STATE PROPERLY: A BAD NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM...

SERVICE POINTS 8: APPLICANT FAILS TO SERVE THE SECRETARY OF STATE PROPERLY: A BAD NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM…

September 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

I don’t know how many planning lawyers subscribe to this site – it may be none do. However I am fairly confident that they could get full value out of their subscription if it persuaded them to pay attention to…

COST (MEGA) BITES 286: AND YOU SAID THAT WITH AN "ADMIRABLY STRAIGHT FACE": "OVERLAWYERING" CONSIDERED IN AN EXHAUSTING CASE

COST (MEGA) BITES 286: AND YOU SAID THAT WITH AN “ADMIRABLY STRAIGHT FACE”: “OVERLAWYERING” CONSIDERED IN AN EXHAUSTING CASE

September 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We are looking at a case that has already been subject to several posts on this site.  In the previous decision about budgeting the claimants’ budgets were described as “absurdly high” and the arguments “strains all credulity”.   The court is…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANT OF PLEADINGS 32: "BOTH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND DEFENCE ARE LENGTHY DOCUMENTS, UNJUSTIFIABLY SO"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANT OF PLEADINGS 32: “BOTH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND DEFENCE ARE LENGTHY DOCUMENTS, UNJUSTIFIABLY SO”

September 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

We are here honing on in one aspect of a decision that was about allocation.  The judge commented on how poor the pleadings of both side were. The Particulars of Claim and Defence were too long, a Reply was unnecessary. …

APPLICANTS FOR INJUNCTIONS: WHY ARE YOU ASKING FOR AN INJUNCTION BUT NOT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS BEFOREHAND? THAT PRACTICE SHOULD STOP: HIGH COURT DECISION

APPLICANTS FOR INJUNCTIONS: WHY ARE YOU ASKING FOR AN INJUNCTION BUT NOT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS BEFOREHAND? THAT PRACTICE SHOULD STOP: HIGH COURT DECISION

September 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content

Here we are looking at the (to my mind somewhat risky) practice of applying for and obtaining an injunction, without actually issuing proceedings.  This judgment is a reminder that this should only happen in exceptional circumstances. (This was an injunction…

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

  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION AN 8 POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE (AUGUST 2019): AND LOOK AT THE LINKS…
  • EXPERT WATCH 66: RED FLAGS AND EXPERTS (1) :THE DUTY TO CONSIDER THE RANGE OF OPINIONS: OFTEN “HONOURED IN THE BREACH”; OFTEN FATAL TO A PARTY’S CASE
  • EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY “WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT” TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
  • ANOTHER INTERESTING DISCUSSION (ABOUT INTEREST…): THE STARTING POINT IS THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR BEING OUT OF ITS MONEY (NO MATTER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE DONE WITH IT…)
  • WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS

Top Posts

EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY "WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT" TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
COST BITES 435: £4 MILLION SPENT IN COSTS AND NEITHER PARTY WILL RECOVER A PENNY FROM THE OTHER: A "PYRHHIC" VICTORY LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS...
COST BITES 436: THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO BEAT THE CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER: WAS IT UNJUST FOR THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY? THE IMPORTANCE OF INTEREST
A WIDOW CANNOT BRING AN ACTION UNDER THE FATAL ACCIDENTS ACT WHERE HER HUSBAND SETTLED THE PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AGAINST A CONCURRENT TORTFEASOR IN HIS LIFETIME
WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS

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.