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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • SHOULD THE COURT ALLOW A “NEWLY APPOINTED” EMPLOYEE TO REPRESENT A LIMITED COMPANY AT A HEARING?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THIRTEEN YEARS OF BLOGGING (JUNE 2013): THE TEENAGE YEARS ARE STARTING…
  • ASKING THE JUDGE QUESTIONS AFTER JUDGMENT IS DELIVERED: THEY HAVE TO BE NECESSARY TO ENABLE THE PARTIES TO UNDERSTAND THE REASONING OF THE DECISION (AND THESE GO TOO FAR…)
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 83: THE CASE OF THE SOLICITOR’S LIEN: THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE DECIDED AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT ON THE BASIS OF AN UNPLEADED CASE
  • THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON SUPERVISION 7: RECORDING ARRANGMENTS (IF IT ISN’T WRITTEN DOWN IT HASN’T HAPPENED…)

Top Posts

NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES' COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
A NEW SERIES OF USEFUL ONLINE CALCULATORS FOR LITIGATORS AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION (WITH A 20% DISCOUNT FOR CLB READERS): MAKING IT ALL ADD UP
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT: HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS: KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
COST BITES 404: JUDGE ORDERS DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: PARTIES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH THE PROCESS OF LITIGATION: "THEY SHOULD BE USING NON-COURT BASED DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHEREVER POSSIBLE"
THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS A JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION IN FAVOUR OF A SOLICITOR: THE OMBUDSMAN GOT NOTHING WRONG (QUITE A LOT HERE ABOUT VULNERABLE CLIENTS AS WELL...)

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.