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 » 28
MAZUR MATTERS 66: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD FINAL REPORT ON MAZUR: "REGULATORY REVIEW OF ADVICE AND GUIDANCE PROVIDED TO THE PROFESSION ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGAITON BY APPROVED REGULATORS AND REGULATORY BODIES"

MAZUR MATTERS 66: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD FINAL REPORT ON MAZUR: “REGULATORY REVIEW OF ADVICE AND GUIDANCE PROVIDED TO THE PROFESSION ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGAITON BY APPROVED REGULATORS AND REGULATORY BODIES”

July 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The LSB report was published yesterday.  It deals with matters that remain of practical significance to working litigators.  Remember a breach of the Legal Services Act in relation to the conduct of litigation is both a criminal offence and a…

COST BITES 419: HOW CLAIMING COUNSEL'S FEES ON AN N260 CAN LEAD TO REFERRAL TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS TO BE CONSIDERED: SIGNATORY BEWARE

COST BITES 419: HOW CLAIMING COUNSEL’S FEES ON AN N260 CAN LEAD TO REFERRAL TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS TO BE CONSIDERED: SIGNATORY BEWARE

July 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Cost Schedules are signed and served every day.  This case shows why they must be checked carefully before signature.  Here the judge found that a claim made for counsel’s fees on an N260 had been false.  This was one of…

SEEKING A STAY PENDING AN APPEAL: "GENERALISED ASSERTIONS ARE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE": COURT REFUSES APPLICATION

SEEKING A STAY PENDING AN APPEAL: “GENERALISED ASSERTIONS ARE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE”: COURT REFUSES APPLICATION

July 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This judgment emphasises the point that a party seeking a stay of a judgment cannot obtain this by “generalised assertions”.  There are clear and well established criteria for the court to consider.  A party making such an application must make …

SERVICE POINTS 50: IS SERVICE OF A TENANT AND AN ADDRESS STATED IN THE LEASE GOOD SERVICE WHEN THE TENANT IS NOT THERE?  DOES THE CONTRACT OVERRIDE THE CPR?

SERVICE POINTS 50: IS SERVICE OF A TENANT AND AN ADDRESS STATED IN THE LEASE GOOD SERVICE WHEN THE TENANT IS NOT THERE? DOES THE CONTRACT OVERRIDE THE CPR?

July 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This Court of Appeal decision considers issues in relation to contractual service.  Does a contractual term in a lease saying that service of documents can take place at the property in question override the CPR provisions as to service? In…

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

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE PROBLEMS THAT CAN OCCUR WITH THE CONTENTS OF THE CLAIM FORM: TEN KEY POINTS
  • BOOK REVIEW: CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION: A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE BY NEIL SUGARMAN
  • PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: “THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT’S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS”
  • TRYING TO RE-OPEN THE CASE AFTER BEING SENT A DRAFT JUDGMENT: “IT IS NOT INTENDED TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ANY PARTY … TO REOPEN OR REARGUE THE CASE”
  • 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…

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"
PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 6 : CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE SOLICITORS WERE NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING UPON SETTLEMENT (IN FACT IT FAILS TO PROVE A LOT OF OTHER MATTERS AS WELL...)
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...
WHAT YOU SAY (OR DON'T SAY) IN A MEDIATION, AND AFTERWARDS, CAN BE OF CRITICAL IMPORTANCE: COURT SETS ASIDE A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND ORDERS REPAYMENT
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"

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.