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 » 07
THE RELEVANCE OF THE ABSENCE OF ORAL EVIDENCE AT INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS: A JUDGE MUST MAKE A DECISION ON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM

THE RELEVANCE OF THE ABSENCE OF ORAL EVIDENCE AT INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS: A JUDGE MUST MAKE A DECISION ON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In this case the claimant appealed against the findings of fact that the court made at first instance. However those findings were made on the basis of written evidence that was before the court.  The claimant had not applied for…

COST BITES 324: COURT REFUSES TO REDUCE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S COSTS BECAUSE OF REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION

COST BITES 324: COURT REFUSES TO REDUCE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

A party liable to pay the costs of a successful opponent is always keen to reduce that liability, not least by arguing that they should have a reduction in costs because of their opponent’s conduct. We see such an argument…

COST BITES 323: HOURLY RATES: THIS CASE DOES NOT FALL INTO LONDON BAND 1: IT CERTAINLY DOES NOT JUSTIFY FEES ABOVE THAT RATE...

COST BITES 323: HOURLY RATES: THIS CASE DOES NOT FALL INTO LONDON BAND 1: IT CERTAINLY DOES NOT JUSTIFY FEES ABOVE THAT RATE…

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are returning to the issue of hourly rates.  In this case the receiving party sought hourly rates that were above the London 1 band.   The judge held that the case did not fall within that band and certainly did…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: FINDINGS OF DISHONESTY WERE WRONG AND COULD NOT STAND: ISSUES OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY ARE NOT SIMPLY A MATTER OF "INTUITION"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: FINDINGS OF DISHONESTY WERE WRONG AND COULD NOT STAND: ISSUES OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY ARE NOT SIMPLY A MATTER OF “INTUITION”

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we look at a case where, unusually, the judge overturned first instance findings of dishonesty.    The circumstances in which those findings were made were seriously flawed.  Important procedural safeguards had not been in place,  not least the allegations…

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

  • MAZUR MATTERS 65 (YES THEY ARE STILL CROPPING UP…): WAS A COMPANY SUING FOR A DEBT IT HAD PURCHASED BREACHING THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT?
  • MEMBER NEWS: USING THE INTERNAL SEARCH FACILITY ON CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF: WHERE TO FIND IT
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: ANOTHER (YES ANOTHER) CASE WHERE A LITIGANT ARGUED “MY CASE WAS SO HOPELESS I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY YOUR COSTS” (OCTOBER 2024)
  • EXPERT WATCH 58: SHOULD A DEFENDANT HAVE PERMISSION TO RELY UPON A NEW EXPERT WHICH WOULD LEAD TO THE TRIAL DATE BEING VACATED?
  • “I HAD NEVER COME ACROSS A CASE IN WHICH SO LITTLE RESPECT HAD BEEN PAID TO THE COURT”: INACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES; OVER-LENGTHY SKELETONS; ENORMOUS BUNDLES (OH AND AN ATTITUDE OF “WE’LL COME INTO COURT WHEN WE WANT TO”…): I CAN’T RECALL JUDICIAL CRITICISM MUCH STRONGER THAN THIS,

Top Posts

"I HAD NEVER COME ACROSS A CASE IN WHICH SO LITTLE RESPECT HAD BEEN PAID TO THE COURT": INACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES; OVER-LENGTHY SKELETONS; ENORMOUS BUNDLES (OH AND AN ATTITUDE OF "WE'LL COME INTO COURT WHEN WE WANT TO"...): I CAN'T RECALL JUDICIAL CRITICISM MUCH STRONGER THAN THIS,
REMEMBER NEW COURT FEES CAME INTO FORCE TODAY: SEE THEM HERE
WE HAD SUCH A HOPELESS CASE WE SHOULDN'T PAY ALL THE COSTS BECAUSE YOU SHOULD HAVE APPLIED TO STRIKE US OUT: ARGUMENTS WITH AN "AIR OF UNREALITY" ABOUT THEM
WHY PRINCE HARRY (AND OTHER PROMINENT CLAIMANTS) LOST WHEN THE JUDGE FOUND THAT THEY WERE ALL HONEST WITNESSES - BUT OTHER WITNESSES THEY CALLED PROVED TO BE "HOSTILE"
HALLUCINATED CASE LAW AND THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE (OF ALL BODIES...)

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.