Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 12.4K other subscribers


Recent Posts
- COST BITES 420 : INDEMNITY COSTS AWARDED: “YOU SHOULD HAVE APPLIED TO STRIKE US OUT” OR “YOU COULD HAVE MADE A LOWER OFFER” ARE NOT AN ATTRACTIVE ARGUMENTS IN THIS CONTEXT
- ANOTHER BREACH OF JUDGMENT EMBARGO CASE: WHY SOLICITORS MUST BADGER THEIR CLIENTS ABOUT COMPLIANCE: “THE COURT EMBARGO IS FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM JOURNALIST EMBARGO”
- WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: LARGE PARTS OF THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE STRUCK OUT: “INADMISSIBLE AS A MATTER OF LAW” “OF MARGINAL RELEVANCE” AND DEAL WITH “WHOLLY COLLATERAL ISSUES”
- 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”
- 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
Top Posts
Archives
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
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
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
You must be logged in to post a comment.