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 » 14
COST BITES 461: "LOSING PARTY" SHOULD PAY COSTS AT THE END OF HEARING, DESPITE HAVING BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL

COST BITES 461: “LOSING PARTY” SHOULD PAY COSTS AT THE END OF HEARING, DESPITE HAVING BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL

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

This case emphasises the importance of the “pay as you go” principle in civil litigation.  The applicants had failed at an interlocutory application.  They were equally unsuccessful in their attempts to persuade the judge that they should not pay the…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 99: ONCE AGAIN - A BARE DENIAL WILL NOT DO: DEFENCE STRUCK OUT: "THIS RULE IS NOT A MATTER OF FORMALITY"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 99: ONCE AGAIN – A BARE DENIAL WILL NOT DO: DEFENCE STRUCK OUT: “THIS RULE IS NOT A MATTER OF FORMALITY”

October 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

This is far from the first time that we have looked at cases that have shown how a bare denial in a pleading is inadequate.  Here Chief Master Shuman emphasised the real danger of pleading a bare denial.  The defence…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY (ii): THE DEFENDANT'S WITNESS HAD NO FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE OF THE ISSUES, KEY DOCUMENTS AND KEY WITNESSES WERE NOT PRESENT

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY (ii): THE DEFENDANT’S WITNESS HAD NO FIRST HAND KNOWLEDGE OF THE ISSUES, KEY DOCUMENTS AND KEY WITNESSES WERE NOT PRESENT

October 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we look at another case where witness evidence was found wanting.  Again this is because of a failure to identify the source of information or belief. This was coupled with the fact that crucial witnesses who could give first…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY (1): THE ABSENCE OF FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION BEING REFUSED

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY (1): THE ABSENCE OF FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION BEING REFUSED

October 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content, Witness statements

There have been numerous cases over the years which highlight the dangers of first hand evidence not being made available to the court.  It is often the case that statements are provided by those who have no first hand knowledge…

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

  • THE DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT PICK AND CHOOSE THE EVIDENCE IT PUTS BEFORE THE COURT: A WITNESS STATEMENT BREACHED THE DUTY OF CANDOUR OWED: WHAT YOU LEAVE OUT CAN SOMETIMES BE MORE IMPORTANT THAT WHAT YOU PUT IN…
  • NO FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY WHERE A CLAIMANT GAVE AN ACCOUNT DIFFERENT TO HER LETTER OF CLAIM: (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE)
  • “THIS IS NOT THE MANNER IN WHICH AN APPLICATION SHOULD BE MADE”: EMAILS TO THE COURT CANNOT TAKE THE PLACE OF APPLICATIONS
  • NON-COMPLIANT CLAIMANTS ARE IN THE LAST CHANCE SALOON (AND THERE ARE 5,000 OF THEM): BUT PARTICULARS MUST BE SERVED AND ADVERSE COSTS STILL PAID
  • WHAT WENT WRONG FOR LITIGATORS IN 2026 AND HOW DO YOU AVOID PROBLEMS IN 2027 ? WEBINAR ON THE 9th DECEMBER ADDRESSES THESE ISSUES [BUY YOURSELF (OR SOMEONE ELSE) AN EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT…]

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)
CLAIMANT'S CLAIM AGAINST INSURER FAILS: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLD DECISION THAT THE INSURED'S FAILURE TO NOTIFY WAS A CONDITION PRECEDENT
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
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
SERVICE POINTS 57: PRESENCE IN THE JURISDICTION, A LAST KNOWN ADDRESS AND THE COST OF GETTING IT WRONG: UNSUCCESFUL CLAIMANT FACES A COSTS BILL OF £500,000...

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.