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 » 26
COST BITES 336: MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" AND DO NOT JUSTIFY A VARIATION IN THE BUDGET: THE JUDGE NOT PERSUADED ON THE USE OF LEADING COUNSEL, NEW SOLICITORS WITH HIGHER HOURLY RATES AND THINGS MISSED FROM THE FIRST BUDGET

COST BITES 336: MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” AND DO NOT JUSTIFY A VARIATION IN THE BUDGET: THE JUDGE NOT PERSUADED ON THE USE OF LEADING COUNSEL, NEW SOLICITORS WITH HIGHER HOURLY RATES AND THINGS MISSED FROM THE FIRST BUDGET

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Here we have a detailed analysis of a defendant’s application to vary (that is more than double) its original costs budget.  At the PTR stage the defendant applied to double its costs budget, some of this was allowed, most was…

ONE OF THE PERILS OF OBTAINING AN INJUNCTION: AN INTERVENER GIVEN LIBERTY TO APPLY TO BRING A POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY AN INJUNCTION: LITIGATORS MUST GIVE CAREFUL ADVICE...

ONE OF THE PERILS OF OBTAINING AN INJUNCTION: AN INTERVENER GIVEN LIBERTY TO APPLY TO BRING A POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY AN INJUNCTION: LITIGATORS MUST GIVE CAREFUL ADVICE…

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Injunctions, Members Content

A party seeking an injunction is usually required to give an undertaking as to damages. That undertaking normally extends to the defendants/respondents to the injunction. However the terms of the injunction often give third parties affected by the injunction a…

SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A "FORMIDABLE BURDEN"

SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A “FORMIDABLE BURDEN”

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Witness statements

A litigant who fails to beat a Part 36 offer can normally expect to face the consequences set out in the rules.  There is an exception if that litigant can satisfy the court that it is “unjust” for those consequences…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A "NON-ADMISSION" AND A DENIAL: IF YOU DENY - YOU HAVE TO SAY WHY...

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A DENIAL: IF YOU DENY – YOU HAVE TO SAY WHY…

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Some defences adopt a scattergun approach of “denying” everything.  Some are more selective – they “put the Claimant to strict proof”.  Many defences ignore the important distinction between a non-admission and a denial.   It is important that practitioners know the…

PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF "21 DAYS" ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES...

PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF “21 DAYS” ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES…

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We have seen numerous cases on this blog where matters have been left the “last minute” and the rules as to the calculation of time become important.  Here we have an interesting example in relation to Part 36.  An offer…

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

  • WILL AN INSURER PAY FOR THIS? A CRUCIAL QUESTION FOR MOST PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMANTS: WEBINAR 30th OCTOBER 2026
  • “LITIGATION SHOULD BE CONDUCTED BY APPLICATIONS AND ORDERS”: “THESE EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS WERE LESS THAN SATISFACTORY…”
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 6: BEING SIGNED OFF WORK DOES NOT MEAN UNABLE TO ATTEND COURT: SUSPENDED COMMITTAL ORDER MADE AGAINST JUDGMENT DEBTOR (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATORS YOU MAY WANT TO READ THIS AS WELL…)
  • PROVING THINGS 301 : CAN AN APPLICANT IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS RELY UPON A JUDGMENT GIVEN AT TRIAL? WHAT WEIGHT SHOULD BE GIVEN TO IT?
  • EXPERT WATCH 79: WHEN A LITIGANT INSTRUCTS AN EXPERT AND THEN SEEKS PERMISSION TO RELY ON THEM: MIXED RESULTS

Top Posts

A SUCCESSFUL JUDICIAL REVIEW OF A DECISION TO REFUSE PERMISSION TO APPEAL: GRANTING JUDGMENT AFTER AN EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION: A "WHOLLY EXCEPTIONAL COLLAPSE OF FAIR PROCEDURE"
SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU...)
COST BITES 465 : WITHOUT PREJUDICE COSTS BREAKDOWNS REMAINED PRIVILEGED: A LOWER BILL DID NOT ESTABLISH “UNAMBIGUOUS IMPROPRIETY”
EXPERT WATCH 78 : "ROWING BACK"?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: "THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT"
CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS, CHANGE OF SOLICITORS AND RATIFICATION AND INFORMED ADVICE: IT IS NOT SO EASY TO SIMPLY RECOMMEND A CHANGE OF SOLICITORS...

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.