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 » 13
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 11: THE LOCAL AUTHORITY COULD NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PERSONAL INJURY TRUSTS AND REFUSE TO PROVIDE  CARE

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 11: THE LOCAL AUTHORITY COULD NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PERSONAL INJURY TRUSTS AND REFUSE TO PROVIDE CARE

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

Here was have a case where the local authority ceased providing funds for a seriously injured person, indeed they demanded money back.  The local authority contended that money in a personal injury trust should properly be taken into account.  Further…

COST BITES 349 : THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED 100% OF THEIR COSTS: THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL WAS A HIGHLY RELEVANT FACTOR

COST BITES 349 : THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED 100% OF THEIR COSTS: THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL WAS A HIGHLY RELEVANT FACTOR

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

It is rare for the Court of Appeal to overturn a first instance decision as to costs. We see an example of this happening here.  The Upper Tribunal awarded the claimant 75% of his costs of a judicial review application…

PART 36: LIABILITY ONLY OFFERS AND THE COURT OF APPEAL:  WE DON'T HAVE CLARITY AND CERTAINTY WE DO HAVE CONFUSION AND AMBIGUITY

PART 36: LIABILITY ONLY OFFERS AND THE COURT OF APPEAL: WE DON’T HAVE CLARITY AND CERTAINTY WE DO HAVE CONFUSION AND AMBIGUITY

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Part 36, Webinar

Those with long memories will recall the confusion  and uncertainty that the Court of Appeal caused in Carver v BAA Plc [2008] EWCA Civ 412 when the concept of a “near miss” was introduced in relation to Part 36. A…

COST BITES 348 : A PARTY SEEKING SECURITY FOR COSTS SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED TIME SPENT IN SETTLEMENT AND ADR

COST BITES 348 : A PARTY SEEKING SECURITY FOR COSTS SHOULD HAVE INCLUDED TIME SPENT IN SETTLEMENT AND ADR

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting comment at the end of the judgment. The judge made an order for security for costs. However he also expressed concern that the defendant’s  estimated costs did not include anything in relation  to the costs of…

EXPERT WATCH 35: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO ADDUCE A SUPPLEMENTARY  REPORT AFTER THE TRIAL HAD ENDED

EXPERT WATCH 35: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO ADDUCE A SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT AFTER THE TRIAL HAD ENDED

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are many (if not all) working advocates who have thought, after a hearing is over, “I could have said that”.  The same may well be true of experts.  Here we have an attempt to introduce new material in a…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: "EXPERTS: THE JOINT REPORT AND THOSE TROUBLESOME "AGENDAS": FEBRUARY 2018

THROWBACK FRIDAY: “EXPERTS: THE JOINT REPORT AND THOSE TROUBLESOME “AGENDAS”: FEBRUARY 2018

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There have been several major issues about the way in which the joint meetings of experts are conducted.  This includes the problems that occur when the parties cannot even agree on an agenda for the meeting.  This post looked at…

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

  • 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…)
  • AN APPLICATION TO SET A DEFAULT JUDGMENT ASIDE (3): THE DENTON CRITERIA CONSIDERED
  • AN APPLICATION TO SET A DEFAULT JUDGMENT ASIDE (2): CONSIDERATION OF “PROMPTNESS” WHEN NOTHING HAPPENED FOR A YEAR…

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.