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 » June » Page 3
COST BITES 394: COURT OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT LANDLORD IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE COSTS: AWARD OF INTEREST ALSO OVERTURNED

COST BITES 394: COURT OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT LANDLORD IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE COSTS: AWARD OF INTEREST ALSO OVERTURNED

June 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interest, Members Content

This is a case where a decision as to costs and interests was overturned on appeal.  The Circuit Judge found that the claimant landlord had no entitlement to claim costs under the terms of the lease.  Further the claim for…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF WITNESS EVIDENCE IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE TRIAL

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF WITNESS EVIDENCE IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE TRIAL

June 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

Much of the discussion in relation to clinical negligence cases is based on expert evidence and the standard of care (and rightly so). However it is important that practitioners do not overlook the vital role played by witness evidence. Those…

DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF A CARER IN A FATAL CASE: FULL COMMERCIAL RATE APPLIED TO CLAIM FOR FUTURE LOSS OF SERVICES

DAMAGES FOR LOSS OF A CARER IN A FATAL CASE: FULL COMMERCIAL RATE APPLIED TO CLAIM FOR FUTURE LOSS OF SERVICES

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

For many years the courts have endeavoured to provide guidance for the appropriate approach to damages when a “carer” is killed.  The principles relating to lost of an “income earner” are generally well established.  Over the past few decades there…

DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW

DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Webinar

Checklists are always a feature of discussions I have with publishers and legal professionals.  I have prepared have created a whole series of checklists for lawyers (9 in total)  and a series for experts (6),  plus a “Judicial Red Flags”…

SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE:  SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY...

SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE: SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY…

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This case, where judgment was given today,  is essential reading for anyone litigating using  CE-File. It is also essential to anyone involved in group litigation.  This is  a case where 5,000 claimants were refused relief from sanctions. That initial difficulty…

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS  (THERE IS NO "DEEMED ADMISSION") PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE "HALLUCINATED" "FICTITIOUS" RULE

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS (THERE IS NO “DEEMED ADMISSION”) PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE “HALLUCINATED” “FICTITIOUS” RULE

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

This case has two important practical points. Firstly (contrary to the case put forward by the claimant) a failure to respond to a Notice to Admit facts does not give rise to an “implied admission” by the recipient of the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: SOME DELAYS WERE UNEXPLAINED AND THERE WERE OTHER BREACHES OF THE RULES: SOME LESSONS ON COMPLIANCE HERE...

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: SOME DELAYS WERE UNEXPLAINED AND THERE WERE OTHER BREACHES OF THE RULES: SOME LESSONS ON COMPLIANCE HERE…

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

We are looking at an (unsuccessful) application for relief from sanctions in a family case.  A husband sought permission to appeal some 10 1/2 months out of time.  What is particularly interesting here are the judge accepted that some delay…

COST BITES 393: A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LAW FIRMS WAS VALID: THERE WAS NO BREACH (AND IF THERE WAS IT WAS NOT MATERIAL): FRESH OFF THE PRESS - JUDGMENT THIS AFTERNOON

COST BITES 393: A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LAW FIRMS WAS VALID: THERE WAS NO BREACH (AND IF THERE WAS IT WAS NOT MATERIAL): FRESH OFF THE PRESS – JUDGMENT THIS AFTERNOON

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Jamie Carpenter KC for drawing my attention to this judgment given this afternoon. It relates to an interesting dispute between law firms. The claimant had entered into a CFA with the defendant. The defendant argued that…

AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A "MINOR ERROR..."

AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A “MINOR ERROR…”

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at how a simple mistake in the naming of a file led to a potentially disastrous problem when it led to an appeal being out of time. The wrong documents were sent to the court when an…

AN APPEAL OVER A TIME ESTIMATE FOR TRIAL: THIS SHOULD NOT LAST 15 DAYS, NOR WILL IT BE DONE IN 5:  EIGHT DAYS REMAINS THE CORRECT CONCLUSION

AN APPEAL OVER A TIME ESTIMATE FOR TRIAL: THIS SHOULD NOT LAST 15 DAYS, NOR WILL IT BE DONE IN 5: EIGHT DAYS REMAINS THE CORRECT CONCLUSION

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This blog has covered issues relating to time estimates many times. I cannot recall, however, a case where there has been an appeal over a judicial determination of a time estimate for a trial. We have such a case here. …

EXPERT WATCH 48: HOW AN EXPERT WITNESS CAN LOSE CREDIBILITY AT TRIAL (IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE - BUT THE PRINCIPLES ARE UNIVERSAL...)

EXPERT WATCH 48: HOW AN EXPERT WITNESS CAN LOSE CREDIBILITY AT TRIAL (IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE – BUT THE PRINCIPLES ARE UNIVERSAL…)

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Some areas of litigation rely heavily on expert evidence. Clinical negligence is often one of those areas. It is always interesting to read judicial views when a matter reaches trial.  Here was have a judgment where the judge considered aspects…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at a recent decision that has major practical implications for  anyone making an application, or anyone disgruntled with a court decision.  The applicant asked, specifically, for an application to be considered on paper.  The matter was considered…

← Previous 1 2 3

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

  • EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
  • EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN
  • PERSONAL INJURY MATTERS 17 (1): LIABILITY CATCHUP (1): PUB OPERATOR IS NOT VICARIOUSLY LIABLE FOR DOORMEN’S ACTS: A CONCLUSION REACHED “WITH REGRET”
  • COST BITES 411: HOW DOES A COURT DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF AN INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS WHEN THE CASE HAS NOT BEEN BUDGETED? SHOULD A PAYMENT BE ORDERED AT ALL?
  • COST BITES 410: A CLAIMANT’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES RELATING TO ISSUE AND PLEADING CANNOT BE USED AS A GROUNDS FOR REDUCING ITS RECOVERABLE COSTS

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

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.