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 » 28
MAZUR COMPLIANT SUPERVISION AND COST EFFECTIVE DELEGATION IN 2025: WEBINAR 5th DECEMBER 2025: "TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT"

MAZUR COMPLIANT SUPERVISION AND COST EFFECTIVE DELEGATION IN 2025: WEBINAR 5th DECEMBER 2025: “TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT”

November 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Webinar, Well being

With an appeal pending (at some indefinite time) and the profession still rife with uncertainty we need to consider, head on, issues relating to delegation and supervision.  Get this right and you will be part of a well run and…

EXPERT WATCH 27 : WHAT DOES THE COURT DO WHEN AN EXPERT'S EXAMINATION HAS BEEN COVERTLY RECORDED? "I HOPE HE WILL NEVER DO IT AGAIN..."

EXPERT WATCH 27 : WHAT DOES THE COURT DO WHEN AN EXPERT’S EXAMINATION HAS BEEN COVERTLY RECORDED? “I HOPE HE WILL NEVER DO IT AGAIN…”

November 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

Covert recordings, of one type or another, are featuring heavily on this blog today.  Here we consider a case where a claimant secretly recorded her examination by an expert instructed by the defendant. The claimant then applied to admit the…

INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED IN CASE WHERE CLAIMANTS OBTAINED INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS' SOLICITOR IN A "STING" OPERATION: "THE CLAIMANTS SOUGHT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE"

INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED IN CASE WHERE CLAIMANTS OBTAINED INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITOR IN A “STING” OPERATION: “THE CLAIMANTS SOUGHT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE”

November 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content

This is a case worth reading if you want to see strong judicial commentary on litigation conduct.  The judge was clear in his view of the conduct that the claimants had engaged in and surprised by its lack of self…

WHEN ONE CLAIMANT FILES A NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: YOU CAN TRY TO CHECK OUT BUT YOU CAN'T NECESSARILY LEAVE

WHEN ONE CLAIMANT FILES A NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: YOU CAN TRY TO CHECK OUT BUT YOU CAN’T NECESSARILY LEAVE

November 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

A claimant can normally file a notice of discontinuance at any time.  However, as this case shows, the position is more complex when there is more than one claimant.  Here we look at a case where someone was surprised to…

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

  • COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATIONS TO AMEND AND TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS: A SUBMISSION THAT “WELL WE WERE LYING WHEN WE SIGNED THOSE STATEMENTS OF TRUTH” IS NOT A GOOD STARTING PLACE
  • ADVISING THE CLIENT OF THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: TEN USEFUL CHECKLIST COUPLED WITH THE RELEVANT LINKS
  • PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 5 : WHY A SOLICITOR CAN BE NEGLIGENT, A CLAIMANT HONEST AND YET BE WHOLLY UNSUCCESSFUL IN A PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE ACTION
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS “HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS”: A USEFUL CHECKLIST AND LINKS TO KEEP YOU ON THE STRAIGHT AND NARROW
  • SERVICE POINTS 54: THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN TIME: THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON A DEFENDANT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 7.7: THE ACTION BITES THE DUST

Top Posts

COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS...)
EXPERT WATCH 71: "I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE": THE EXPERT WAS "ADVOCATING" AND "HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL"
THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE RIGHT TO REPLY: WHEN MUST YOU DO IT AND WHEN SHOULD YOU DO IT? THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF A DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM

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.