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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 77: CASE STRUCK OUT: THERE WAS “INSUFFICIENT PLEADINGS OF FACT FROM WHICH IT COULD BE INFERRED THAT ANY OF THE ALLEGATIONS HAVE A REAL PROSPET OF SUCCESS”
  • SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: TIPS FOR TESTIFYING IN COURT: FROM THE UNITED STATE’S ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA)
  • SERVICE POINTS 43: WHY CPR 6.15 IS NOT THE “CAVALRY” COMING OVER THE HILL TO SAVE YOU IF THE CLAIM FORM HAS NOT BEEN SERVED PROPERLY
  • SERVICE POINTS 42: A £82 MILLION POUND FAILS BECAUSE THE CLAIM FORM WAS SENT BY EMAIL TO SOLICITORS WHO HAD NOT STATED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT SERVICE: AN OLD ISSUE (AND A BIG ONE)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.