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 » October » 17
COST BITES 296: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS APPELLANTS' APPLICATION FOR A COSTS CAP: CAN THE LITIGATING TENANTS  PUSH THE COSTS RISKS ONTO THE NON-LITIGANTS?

COST BITES 296: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS APPELLANTS’ APPLICATION FOR A COSTS CAP: CAN THE LITIGATING TENANTS PUSH THE COSTS RISKS ONTO THE NON-LITIGANTS?

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at a Court of Appeal decision in relation to the costs capping on an appeal. It was common ground that the Court had the power to order a costs cap if so minded.  However the practical…

ADVOCACY IN THE CIVIL COURTS 2025: WEBINAR 23rd OCTOBER 2025

ADVOCACY IN THE CIVIL COURTS 2025: WEBINAR 23rd OCTOBER 2025

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Webinar, Written advocacy

Regular readers of this blog will know that I regularly take you through guides and hints to advocacy, being particularly keen on those articles and comments given by judges.  A lot of that will feature in this webinar which aims…

(NOT) PROVING THINGS 272: AN ABSENT WITNESS LEADS TO ADVERSE INFERENCES BEING DRAWN: PROBLEM OCCUR WHEN YOUR CASE AT TRIAL IS WHOLLY DIFFERENT TO THE PLEADED CASE

(NOT) PROVING THINGS 272: AN ABSENT WITNESS LEADS TO ADVERSE INFERENCES BEING DRAWN: PROBLEM OCCUR WHEN YOUR CASE AT TRIAL IS WHOLLY DIFFERENT TO THE PLEADED CASE

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Many people have noted that the argument that the court should draw adverse inferences from the absence of key witnesses is often bypassed by the courts, with judges preferring to base their decisions on the evidence of witnesses that are…

EXPERT WATCH 20: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHEN THE PARTIES CANNOT AGREE INSTRUCTIONS TO A SINGLE JOINT EXPERT

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Here we are looking at a case where there was an issue as to the instructions given, or to be given, to a single joint expert.  The judge set out the basis upon which such experts are instructed and the…

MAZUR MATTERS 20:  TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION? PLUS A SNIPPET OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE

MAZUR MATTERS 20: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION? PLUS A SNIPPET OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Useful links

I am continuing with the Mazur series by looking at two more useful links from reputable sources.  One, from the Bar Standards Board,  on what is not the conduct of litigation the other the Law Society Practice Note on these…

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 12.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • DOES AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMOUNT TO A “STEP IN THE ACTION” SO THAT AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE IS DISPLACED? AN IMPORTANT QUESTION CONSIDERED ON APPEAL
  • WHEN POSSIBLE FRAUDULENT CONDUCT EMERGES – CAN A SOLICITOR SIMPLY CARRY ON AS BEFORE? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
  • CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 2026: HOUSING LAWYERS BE AWARE…
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 95: THE DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT THAT THE JUDGE HAD AWARDED THE CLAIMANTS MORE THAN THEIR PLEADED CASE
  • EXPERT WATCH 72: THE DEFENDANT HAD LEFT IT TOO LATE TO OBJECT TO THE CLAIMANTS’ EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AT TRIAL NOT AT THE APPEAL STAGE

Top Posts

COST BITES 455: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY ON WHETHER A CLIENT IS ENTITLED TO RAISE PART 18 QUESTIONS AS TO WHETHER THE SOLICITOR OBTAINED COMMISSION ON AN ATE PREMIUM
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WAIVING LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE BY MENTIONING IT IN A WITNESS STATEMENT
COST BITES 456: LET US ALL REMEMBER THAT THE DISPUTE THAT REACHED THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY WAS OVER THE PRINCELY SUM OF £25: "THE CLIENT HAS NEVER HAD ANY REAL ECONOMIC INTEREST IN THE PURSUIT OF THIS COSTLY LITIGATION"
PROPORTIONALITY IN LITIGATION (1): A TEN POINT GUIDE FOR CIVIL LITIGATORS: A REVIEW OF CASE LAW AND POSTS OVER THE PAST 13 YEARS
THE SRA CANNOT COMPEL A SOLICITOR TO DISCLOSE A CLIENT’S PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS: THE FUNDAMENTAL IMPORTANCE OF LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE

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.