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 » May » 20
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 74: A PARTY CANNOT SIMPLY SEEK TO AMEND THE LIST OF ISSUES TO INCLUDE AN ISSUE THAT IT HAS NEVER PLEADED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 74: A PARTY CANNOT SIMPLY SEEK TO AMEND THE LIST OF ISSUES TO INCLUDE AN ISSUE THAT IT HAS NEVER PLEADED

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we have an unusual case in that the defendant, rather than seeking to amend its defence, sought permission to amend the list of issues to enable it to argue a new point which (the judge found) had not been…

WEBINARS AVAILABLE ON DEMAND: WITNESS STATEMENTS; MAZUR; INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION AND PART 36: A HEADY BREW TO LIGHTEN UP ANY LITIGATOR'S DAY...

WEBINARS AVAILABLE ON DEMAND: WITNESS STATEMENTS; MAZUR; INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION AND PART 36: A HEADY BREW TO LIGHTEN UP ANY LITIGATOR’S DAY…

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar, Witness statements

Four webinars are now available “on demand” from Civil Litigation Brief: PD57AC; Mazur in the Court of Appeal; Informing the Client about the Costs of Litigation; Part 36 recent developments. THE COSTS (The costs are £75.00 plus VAT if you…

A CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER THAT GAVE A 9% DISCOUNT WAS "SOBER AND REALISTIC": IT WAS NOT UNJUST FOR THE DEFENDANT TO FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT IT

A CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER THAT GAVE A 9% DISCOUNT WAS “SOBER AND REALISTIC”: IT WAS NOT UNJUST FOR THE DEFENDANT TO FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT IT

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we have another case where the court considered an argument that it was “unjust” for an unsuccessful defendant to face the normal Part 36 consequences when they had failed to beat a claimant’s Part 36 offer.  This judgment shows…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 73: COURT STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR £2.1 MILLION FOLLOWING McLAREN CATCHING FIRE: THE CASE WAS NOT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 73: COURT STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR £2.1 MILLION FOLLOWING McLAREN CATCHING FIRE: THE CASE WAS NOT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Here we have a case where the judge considers in considerable detail the principles relating to pleading, the striking out of pleadings, and the possibility of being allowed to amend.  None of these favoured the claimant. “It is not sufficient…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WITNESS EVIDENCE, A LATE APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES...

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WITNESS EVIDENCE, A LATE APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES…

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we have an example of a litigation strategy backfiring. The applicant made a (late) application for summary judgment to be heard on the first day of the trial. The respondents filed evidence in response to the application.  Much of…

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

  • MI5: CONTEMPT OF COURT AND THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTERNAL REPORTS: THEY ARE ADMISSIBLE BUT CANNOT BE USED TO PROVE ANYTHING: A POINT OF GENERAL RELEVANCE NOT JUST SECRET AGENTS…
  • COST BITES 458: “PLEASE JUDGE WE’D LIKE MORE TIME TO PAY THE COSTS”: THE RULES AND CASES CONSIDERED
  • COSTS BITES 457 — A FAILED FRAUD CLAIM, INDEMNITY COSTS AND 14 DAYS TO PAY: “I CONSIDER THAT THIS WAS COMMERCIAL CONDUCT OUT OF THE NORM” (OH, AND YOU DON’T GET MORE TIME TO PAY JUST BECAUSE YOU’RE A LARGE ORGANISATION)
  • COST BITES 456: THE CLAIMANT HAD SUCCEEDED ON ALL FOUGHT POINTS: THERE WOULD BE NO REDUCTION OF ITS COSTS: INDEMNITY COSTS IN A LANDLORD AND TENANT DISPUTE
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHY A SOLICITOR TAKES TO TAKE GREAT WHEN MAKING STATEMENTS: “AN UNIMPRESSIVE WITNESS ON WHOSE EVIDENCE I CAN PLACE LITTLE RELIANCE” (IS WHAT WE DON’T WANT TO SEE…)

Top Posts

WRITING LETTERS TO THE JUDGE AFTER A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS CIRCULATED: "THIS IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE CONDUCT OF SOLICITORS CONDUCTING LITIGATION AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET"
FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT
EXPERT WATCH 84: THE TRIAL JUDGE'S APPROACH TO THE EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS WRONG: THE APPROACH IN TUI HAD TO BE CONSIDERED: AN IMPORTANT DECISION FOR HOUSING LAWYERS...

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.