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 » 20
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 51: TOO LATE TO AMEND A REPLY WHICH WAS INADEQUATELY PARTICULARISED IN ANY EVENT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 51: TOO LATE TO AMEND A REPLY WHICH WAS INADEQUATELY PARTICULARISED IN ANY EVENT

January 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Statements of Case

There has been a recent flurry in cases about late amendment and also about Replies. Both issues are considered her. The claimant applied to amend its Reply five weeks before trial. The revised Reply attempted to put forward a “counterfactual”…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 50: A CHANGE OF COUNSEL IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO PERMIT AMENDED PLEADINGS(AKA WHY FAMILY LAWYERS NEED TO READ THIS SERIES...)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 50: A CHANGE OF COUNSEL IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO PERMIT AMENDED PLEADINGS(AKA WHY FAMILY LAWYERS NEED TO READ THIS SERIES…)

January 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

I cannot recall dealing with a case in this series which involved the Family Courts. However we have a detailed exposition and consideration of the relevant principles relating to late amendment here. One factor is the absence of a good…

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 406: CAN A PARTY RECOVER UNNECESSARY COSTS AS DAMAGES? THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN UNNECESSARY SECOND ACTION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • THE WEBINAR ON THE SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: WHAT LITIGATION FIRMS NEED TO KNOW: TOGETHER WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS AND TEMPLATESNOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • COST BITES 405: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT LEAD TO A DEDUCTION OF 45% OF THEIR COSTS? A TOOTH DECISION…
  • 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…

Top Posts

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.