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 » November » 07
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 36:  A "SCATTERGUN" APPROACH DOES NOT HELP THE CLAIMANTS' CASE (NOR DOES FAILING TO PLEAD KEY ASSERTIONS OF BREACH AND DAMAGES...)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 36: A “SCATTERGUN” APPROACH DOES NOT HELP THE CLAIMANTS’ CASE (NOR DOES FAILING TO PLEAD KEY ASSERTIONS OF BREACH AND DAMAGES…)

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

A “scattergun” approach is rarely wise in relation to allegations in pleadings.  Here, however we have a case where the judge found that there was both a scattergun approach and a failure to plead in relation to key matters of liability…

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 2: (MIS) CONDUCT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 2: (MIS) CONDUCT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Staying with the conference today.  Costs Judge Leonard gave an interesting talk on “conduct” in the assessment process which he, said was more accurately about “misconduct in the assessment process. (This was one of Judge Leonard’s slides. It highlights the…

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Today I am writing directly from the Association of Costs Lawyers conference in London. Unsurprisingly the first two speakers considered Mazur.  This is a highly abbreviated version of their talks.  ANDREW ROY KC Andrew, kindly referring to this blog as…

MAZUR MATTERS 34: "LEGAL EXECUTIVES" AND THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT LITIGATION AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION PAPER FROM 2010: ANOTHER PIECE OF THE "HOW HAS THIS HAPPENED"? JIGSAW

MAZUR MATTERS 34: “LEGAL EXECUTIVES” AND THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT LITIGATION AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION PAPER FROM 2010: ANOTHER PIECE OF THE “HOW HAS THIS HAPPENED”? JIGSAW

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We have, in the past few months, been addressing issues that arise from a statute passed some 18 years ago. The issues in relation to the obligation of solicitors and authorised persons (and only solicitors and authorised persons) to conduct litigation…

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

  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 7: SECOND ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE A FOREIGN JUDGMENT WAS (AMONG OTHER THINGS) AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
  • LITIGATOR’S LIFELINES 3: WHAT IF YOU HAVE SERVED A SCHEDULE OF COSTS LATE?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “SKELETON ARGUMENTS – DO THEM PROPERLY OR YOU WON’T GET PAID” (NOVEMBER 2014)
  • COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE
  • 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 …

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"
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 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
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.