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 » July » 03
COST BITES 409: A PART 36 CASE TO FINISH OFF THE WEEK: CLAIM £8.4 MILLION GET £102,000 (HAVING TURNED DOWN AN OFFER OF £3.175 MILLION): IT IS NOT "UNJUST" FOR THE CLAIMANT TO FACE TO NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES, NOR WOULD THE COURT "PICK AND CHOOSE" IN RELATION TO THE COSTS PAYABLE

COST BITES 409: A PART 36 CASE TO FINISH OFF THE WEEK: CLAIM £8.4 MILLION GET £102,000 (HAVING TURNED DOWN AN OFFER OF £3.175 MILLION): IT IS NOT “UNJUST” FOR THE CLAIMANT TO FACE TO NORMAL PART 36 CONSEQUENCES, NOR WOULD THE COURT “PICK AND CHOOSE” IN RELATION TO THE COSTS PAYABLE

July 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Risks of litigation

If ever a case served as a warning to the risks of litigation it is this one.  The claimant sought damages of up to £8.4 million but obtained judgment of £102,000. This turned out to be expensive litigation, with the…

COST BITES 408: WHO (IF ANYONE) SHOULD PAY THE COSTS WHEN THE COURT MAKES NO DECISION ON THE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE?

COST BITES 408: WHO (IF ANYONE) SHOULD PAY THE COSTS WHEN THE COURT MAKES NO DECISION ON THE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE?

July 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Group Litigation Orders, Injunctions, Members Content

In this case the judge considered an argument that a claimant who made, but failed, in an application for an interim injunction should not necessarily be liable for costs. This argument was put forward on the basis that the court…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: "WHICH WITNESS WILL BE BELIEVED? IS IT ALL A LOTTERY? (JULY 2014): ISSUES OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY CONSIDERED

THROWBACK FRIDAY: “WHICH WITNESS WILL BE BELIEVED? IS IT ALL A LOTTERY? (JULY 2014): ISSUES OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY CONSIDERED

July 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This week we go back 12 years to look at one of the recurring themes of this blog: witness credibility.   We looked at a judgment which was all about the judge’s assessment of the witnesses. This was made more difficult…

EXPERT WATCH 54 :  THE DEPUTY MASTER SHOULD NOT HAVE IGNORED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT:  IT WAS RELEVANT AND ADDRESSED THE CENTRAL ISSUE

EXPERT WATCH 54 : THE DEPUTY MASTER SHOULD NOT HAVE IGNORED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT: IT WAS RELEVANT AND ADDRESSED THE CENTRAL ISSUE

July 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are looking at a case where, on appeal, the judge found that a Deputy Master fell into error by failing to take into account relevant expert evidence provided by a claimant.   The judge held that the Master had misunderstood…

A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS 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..."

A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS 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…”

July 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There are numerous cases reported on this blog where judges have been critical of the “evidence” given by solicitors in witness statements.  In many cases, even on cursory examination, it transpires that the lawyer is not in a position to…

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

  • COST BITES 448: PART 36 AND FIXED COSTS: “VERY LATE” ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT’S OFFER LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING NO COSTS AT ALL
  • COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
  • SERVICE POINTS 56 : PERSONAL SERVICE NOT EFFECTED: COURT RETROSPECTIVELY APPROVES ALTERNATIVE SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS IN CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
  • DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU COULD BE MADE BANKRUPT (OSTENSIBLY ON YOUR OWN APPLICATION), NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT – AND THEN HAVE TO PAY THE TRUSTEE’S COSTS? THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING KEY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: A CASE WHERE THE SOLICITORS’ EVIDENCE (OF THEIR OWN) LOSS WAS “WHOLLY INADEQUATE” (OCTOBER 2017)

Top Posts

COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU...)
EXPERT WATCH 78 : "ROWING BACK"?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: "THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT"
CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS, CHANGE OF SOLICITORS AND RATIFICATION AND INFORMED ADVICE: IT IS NOT SO EASY TO SIMPLY RECOMMEND A CHANGE OF SOLICITORS...
COST BITES 466: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ABILITY TO AWARD INTEREST ON COSTS TO LITIGANTS CONDUCTING LITIGATION ON A CFA

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.