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 » October » 09
PROVING THINGS 298: CLAIMANT BANK FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE EVEN THOUGH ONE DEFENDANT WAS DEBARRED FROM DEFENDING: VERIFIED PLEADINGS AND DOCUMENTARY COMMENTARY WERE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR PROOF

PROVING THINGS 298: CLAIMANT BANK FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE EVEN THOUGH ONE DEFENDANT WAS DEBARRED FROM DEFENDING: VERIFIED PLEADINGS AND DOCUMENTARY COMMENTARY WERE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR PROOF

October 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we have a case where the claimant failed to prove its case  seeking approximately US$9.6 million.” even when one of the defendants was debarred from defending. Relying on signed statements of case, inferential evidence from witness statements and comments…

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

  • PROVING THINGS 298: CLAIMANT BANK FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE EVEN THOUGH ONE DEFENDANT WAS DEBARRED FROM DEFENDING: VERIFIED PLEADINGS AND DOCUMENTARY COMMENTARY WERE NO SUBSTITUTE FOR PROOF
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF DONE ABOUT … OPPOSING APPLICATIONS TO AMEND STATEMENTS OF CASE? TEN KEY POINTS AND A BONUS POINT ABOUT LISTS OF ISSUES
  • STRIKING OUT AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: WHEN EARLIER ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS DO NOT PREVENT A SUBSEQUENT CLAIM: AND YOU CANNOT SIMPLY BYPASS CPR PART 24
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF DONE ABOUT … APPLICATIONS TO AMEND STATEMENTS OF CASE? TEN KEY POINTS FOR APPLICANTS (PLUS A “BONUS POINT” AND USEFUL LINKS…).)
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 98 : THE COURT REJECTS A LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT HAVE A STRONG CASE

Top Posts

DECODING THE DIRECTORIES: ALSO WHO ASSESSES THOSE WHO ASSESS US: CAN LAWYERS BITE BACK? A WHOLLY FICTIONAL EXAMPLE...
ARE YOU SURE WHO IS REALLY INSTRUCTING YOU? SOLICITORS DECEIVED BY A FALSE EMAIL ADDRESS IN NAOMI CAMPBELL’S CASE
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHAT DO YOU DO IF A WITNESS FINDS A MISTAKE IN THEIR STATEMENT?
COSTS BITES 461: WINNING THE CASE BUT LOSING THE MAIN BATTLE MEANS CLAIMANT RECOVERS 85% OF COSTS: DEFENDANT CANNOT SEEK THE ADVANTAGES OF PART 36 WITHOUT MAKING A PART 36 OFFER
EXPERT WATCH 76 : EXPERT EVIDENCE MAY ASSIST, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS REASONABLY REQUIRED: PERMISSION REFUSED IN AN APPEAL WORTH TENS OF MILLIONS

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.