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 » April » 22
SERVICE POINTS 36 : "THIS IS AN AREA OF UNDOUBTED STRICTNESS": ERRORS IN SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM WERE FATAL TO THE CLAIM

SERVICE POINTS 36 : “THIS IS AN AREA OF UNDOUBTED STRICTNESS”: ERRORS IN SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM WERE FATAL TO THE CLAIM

April 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form

Regular readers of this site will not need reminding of the strictness of the rules relating to service of the claim form.  Here we have another example. The claimant failed to serve the sealed claim form within the period allowed…

COST BITES 377: THE COURT WOULD NOT STAY A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PENDING THE DEFENDANT'S APPEAL AND/OR APPLICATION FOR A RIGHT TO SET OFF THEIR OWN COSTS (WHY WHAT IS TAKEN OUT OF DRAFT ORDER CAN BE AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT IS LEFT IN...)

COST BITES 377: THE COURT WOULD NOT STAY A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PENDING THE DEFENDANT’S APPEAL AND/OR APPLICATION FOR A RIGHT TO SET OFF THEIR OWN COSTS (WHY WHAT IS TAKEN OUT OF DRAFT ORDER CAN BE AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT IS LEFT IN…)

April 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

Here we have an unusual issue, caused by the defendant agreeing to an unusual order (more accurately the removal of a proposed term of an order). The defendant was liable to pay the claimant’s costs of a hearing which were…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 12: WHAT IS A CLAIMANT TO DO ABOUT CRU IF THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND NOT RESPONDING?

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 12: WHAT IS A CLAIMANT TO DO ABOUT CRU IF THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND NOT RESPONDING?

April 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

This case considers the issues that arise when a defendant has failed to comply with its statutory obligation to notify the Compensation Recovery Unit of a claim.  What duties does the claimant have in these circumstances.  The blunt answer is…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY:  COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP AGAIN (GUESS THE REASON...): YOUR STATEMENTS DID COMPLY WITH PD57AC SO WE ARE JUST GOING TO IGNORE THE ERRANT PARTS

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP AGAIN (GUESS THE REASON…): YOUR STATEMENTS DID COMPLY WITH PD57AC SO WE ARE JUST GOING TO IGNORE THE ERRANT PARTS

April 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we have (yet another) case about a failure to comply with PD57AC.  The response of the defendants here was simply to state that they would not cross-examine the claimants’ witnesses on material that was irrelevant or inadmissible. “I was…

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

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.