Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2026 » January » 05
COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES PERMISSION FOR APPELLANT TO AMEND PLEADINGS OR RELY ON NEW EVIDENCE: GET YOUR CASE TOGETHER BEFORE AN APPLICATION NOT AFTER IT...

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES PERMISSION FOR APPELLANT TO AMEND PLEADINGS OR RELY ON NEW EVIDENCE: GET YOUR CASE TOGETHER BEFORE AN APPLICATION NOT AFTER IT…

January 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment, Witness statements

In this judgment today the Court of Appeal refused an application by an appellant to rely on amended Particulars of Claim or adduce new evidence in a case where the claim was struck out. The Court made the point that…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 45:   THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM SHOWED NO ARGUABLE CAUSE OF ACTION AND WERE STRUCK OUT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 45: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM SHOWED NO ARGUABLE CAUSE OF ACTION AND WERE STRUCK OUT

January 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Here we have an example of a case where the allegations against the proposed (Part 20) defendant were inadequately pleaded. So inadequate that the judge struck out the particulars and refused the applicant’s permission to rely on amended particulars (which…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 6 : CAUSATION WHEN THE INJURIES OCCURRED BEFORE THE NEGLIGENCE: THE BREACHES MADE NO DIFFERENCE TO THE OUTCOME

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 6 : CAUSATION WHEN THE INJURIES OCCURRED BEFORE THE NEGLIGENCE: THE BREACHES MADE NO DIFFERENCE TO THE OUTCOME

January 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

Practitioners in every field of litigation need to be aware of the need to prove causation in addition to breach.  This requirement can sound particularly harshly in clinical negligence.  We see an example here.  There were some breaches of the…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING APPLICATIONS: WORDING AND TIMING

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING APPLICATIONS: WORDING AND TIMING

January 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Last week we looked a case where the parties to a day long application had incurred costs over of £1.3 million.  That case emphasises that applications can be expensive. Further they can sometimes be expensive, leaving the applicant in a…

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

  • COST BITES 402: DOES THE FACT THAT LEGAL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID BY RELATIVES MEAN THAT A RESPONDENT IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS? THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE CONSIDERED
  • ASSESSORS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN ADMIRALTY CASES: WHY WERE THEY NECESSARY? APPELLANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED FROM THAT SINKING FEELING …
  • DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: THE SOLICITORS CONDUCT WAS A “MATTER OF VERY REAL CONCERN” – BUT THE APPLICATION WAS GRANTED
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM “FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT”: THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT
  • THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

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.