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 » 14
CAN THE WORDING OF A COVERING LETTER ENCLOSING TERMS OF BUSINESS FROM A SOLICITOR TO A CLIENT GIVE RISE TO AN ESTOPPEL SO AS TO PREVENT RELIANCE ON THOSE TERMS?

CAN THE WORDING OF A COVERING LETTER ENCLOSING TERMS OF BUSINESS FROM A SOLICITOR TO A CLIENT GIVE RISE TO AN ESTOPPEL SO AS TO PREVENT RELIANCE ON THOSE TERMS?

July 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we look at a case where a solicitor’s (former) client argued that the wording of a covering letter enclosing the firm’s terms and conditions meant that they were estopped from relying on those terms.  It is an interesting example…

CAN THE COURT REFUSE TO ISSUE A CLAIM FORM? CAN THE STAFF LAWFULLY REFER THE ISSUE TO THE JUDGE? AN UNUSUAL APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

CAN THE COURT REFUSE TO ISSUE A CLAIM FORM? CAN THE STAFF LAWFULLY REFER THE ISSUE TO THE JUDGE? AN UNUSUAL APPLICATION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW

July 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

Here we look at an unusual application for judicial review. It is all about the powers of the County Court to refer matters, upon issue, to the judge for consider.  It makes clear that court staff have no power to…

COST BITES 412: SHOULD THE CLAIMANT'S FAILURE TO GIVE FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE ON AN APPLICATION TO SERVE OUT LEAD TO THE DEFENDANTS RECOVERING INDEMNITY COSTS: CONDUCT CONSIDERED

COST BITES 412: SHOULD THE CLAIMANT’S FAILURE TO GIVE FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE ON AN APPLICATION TO SERVE OUT LEAD TO THE DEFENDANTS RECOVERING INDEMNITY COSTS: CONDUCT CONSIDERED

July 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Service of the claim form

This judgment considers whether certain, admitted, failures by the claimant to give full and frank disclosure should lead to costs being awarded against it, even though it defeated the defendants’ application to set aside the order that was made. The…

WAS A SOLICITOR'S CAP ON LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENCE TO £3 MILLION "REASONABLE": COULD IT SURVIVE THE UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT REQUIREMENTS?

WAS A SOLICITOR’S CAP ON LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENCE TO £3 MILLION “REASONABLE”: COULD IT SURVIVE THE UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT REQUIREMENTS?

July 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Professional negligence,

One of the issues in this case related to whether a solicitor’s contractual cap of £3 million was reasonable. The solicitor’s terms of business limited liability to £3 million. Could that cap, on the facts of this case, survive the…

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

  • YOU CAN’T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN’T ATTEND – BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS …
  • PROVING THINGS 305 : DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH ANY BREACHES AND (IN ANY EVENT) HAD MADE A PROFIT HERE NOT A LOSS: IF YOU PLEAD DAMAGES YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVE THEM
  • SERVICE POINTS 59: AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO SERVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DID NOT EXTEND TIME FOR THE CLAIM FORM: NEITHER DID THE ACTUAL STRIKING OUT OF THE ACTION…
  • THERE HAS NOT BEEN FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: THE DIFFICULTIES WHEN LITIGATION SPANS SEVERAL JURISDICTIONS: “THE SUPPOSED EXPLANATIONS BELATEDLY OFFERED … AMOUNT TO LITTLE MORE THAN AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE FAILING WITH A RATHER LAME CONFESSION OF INABILITY TO EXPLAIN HOW OR WHY IT OCCURRED”
  • 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…

Top Posts

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...
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"
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
YOU CAN'T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN'T ATTEND - BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS ...
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT

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.