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 » 31
AS IT STARTS TO GET DARK: LAWYERS HALLOWEEN STORIES: DIGGING UP THE PAST...

AS IT STARTS TO GET DARK: LAWYERS HALLOWEEN STORIES: DIGGING UP THE PAST…

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Well being

Way back in the mists of antiquity (2017) I invited lawyers on Twitter (Now “X”) to share their views on what scares the legal profession most.  The first post came from Megan Boyd (based in Atlanta, Georgia).  This shows that…

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking here at at case where an action was struck out because of  a failure to obtain permission of the court to issue proceedings. The judge rejected the claimant’s contention that the statute in question should be read…

DOES THE COUNTY COURT HAVE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE AN ACTION BROUGHT ON A FOREIGN JUDGMENT? SHOULD THE ACTION BE STRUCK OUT?

DOES THE COUNTY COURT HAVE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE AN ACTION BROUGHT ON A FOREIGN JUDGMENT? SHOULD THE ACTION BE STRUCK OUT?

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

Here we have the County Court considering an unusual issue of jurisdiction. Does it have jurisdiction to decide an action brought at common law on a foreign judgment? If it does not should the action be struck out or simply…

MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 28: IT WAS “SLIGHTLY SURPRISING” THAT A PARALEGAL “DID NOT KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT APPLICABLE TO NON-SOLICITORS”

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Here we look at a judge’s comments outside the ambit of litigation.  Nevertheless it shows that the issue of professional regulation and the use of “non-authorised” employees within solicitor’s firms may well become a more important issue in the future….

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.