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 » February » 06
COST BITES 344: INSOLVENCY COURT HAS POWER TO MAKE A PRO BONO COSTS ORDER FOR THE COSTS OF COUNSEL: POINTS TO WARN ABOUT IF YOUR OPPONENTS ARE ACTING ON A PRO BONO BASIS

COST BITES 344: INSOLVENCY COURT HAS POWER TO MAKE A PRO BONO COSTS ORDER FOR THE COSTS OF COUNSEL: POINTS TO WARN ABOUT IF YOUR OPPONENTS ARE ACTING ON A PRO BONO BASIS

February 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We have looked at pro bono costs orders several times.   This case has an unusual twist in that the case was an insolvency case. The judge considered the Insolvency Rules and found that the court had power to make an…

THE PROFOUND DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDING PROCEEDINGS TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAS EXPIRED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: WHY CLAIMANTS HAVE TO BE CERTAIN OF WHO THEY ARE SUING...

THE PROFOUND DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDING PROCEEDINGS TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAS EXPIRED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: WHY CLAIMANTS HAVE TO BE CERTAIN OF WHO THEY ARE SUING…

February 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Professional negligence,

This decision today emphasises the difficulties for a claimant who has waited until near the end of the limitation period, issued and then finds that they have not sued the correct defendant.  It is now less likely that a court…

COST BITES 343: AN OPPORTUNITY HAVE A CLOSE LOOK AT A CASE BEING BUDGETED: "I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE OVERALL FIGURE PUT FORWARD IS PRIMA FACIE DISPROPORTIONATE"

COST BITES 343: AN OPPORTUNITY HAVE A CLOSE LOOK AT A CASE BEING BUDGETED: “I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT THE OVERALL FIGURE PUT FORWARD IS PRIMA FACIE DISPROPORTIONATE”

February 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

It is not often we get a chance to look at a budgeting decision.  These cases are interesting and important because they show some light on the process. They also show the factors the courts consider when undertaking the budgeting…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: MAKING SURE YOU ARE "LEGALLY STREETWISE": "CLIENT'S MAY SEEK TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF YOU" (FEBRUARY 2016)

THROWBACK FRIDAY: MAKING SURE YOU ARE “LEGALLY STREETWISE”: “CLIENT’S MAY SEEK TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF YOU” (FEBRUARY 2016)

February 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Well being

This post started in an unusual way.  It was originally an online post from a firm of solicitors (Darlingtons) and I obtained their permission to set out the key points. Unfortunately Darlingtons are no longer trading and the full post…

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

  • COST BITES 415: A LOOK AT SOME SUMMARY ASSESSMENTS IN AN ACTION: HOURLY RATES NOT GOING FOR A SONG
  • 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
  • COST BITES 414 : A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER STILL HAD AN IMPACT ON THE AWARD OF COSTS: CLAIMANTS COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS AFTER DATE OF OFFER
  • CIVIL PROCEDURE, OPAQUE EVIDENCE AND “YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN”: ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN REJECTED BY THE COURTS – TWO EXAMPLES AND THE UNHAPPY CONSEQUENCES FOR THE LITIGANTS…
  • COST BITES 413: GET YOUR FUNDING IN PLACE AND TELL EVERYONE IF THE MUSIC HAS STOPPED: CAT AWARDS COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS DUE TO CONDUCT

Top Posts

REMEMBER NEW COURT FEES CAME INTO FORCE TODAY: SEE THEM HERE
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...)
WAS A SOLICITOR'S CAP ON LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENCE TO £3 MILLION "REASONABLE": COULD IT SURVIVE THE UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT REQUIREMENTS?
CAN THE COURT REFUSE TO ISSUE A CLAIM FORM? CAN THE STAFF LAWFULLY REFER THE ISSUE TO THE JUDGE? AN UNUSUAL APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

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.