Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham.
Browse: Home » gexall
"BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME": THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF "SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS"

“BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME”: THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF “SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS”

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure

An interesting explanation of why practitioners, and others, are having problems with access to rules of court and listing can be found in The Register – which provides news on technology for I T Professionals.  The Register reports that the…

AN APPLICATION THAT WAS "OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT": NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Limitation, Striking out

The issue of non-payment, or under-payment, of court fees was considered by the Court of Appeal in the judgment today in  Butters & Anor v Hayes [2021] EWCA Civ 252. THE CASE During the course of an action the court…

THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND…

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure

After some, shall we say “adverse”, comments on the way that the Civil Procedure Rules are presented on the government website the “old” site has has been given a reprieve.   ON THE JUSTICE WEBSITE The Rules are still available…

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: "DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE"

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: “DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE”

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Moulder in PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors [2021] EWHC 411 (Comm) provides a further example of the contention that obtaining witness evidence is  probably not part of the “stock in trade” of those who…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 91: MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT IS STILL ALIVE WHEN YOU ISSUE - AT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL: A SITUATION THAT IS UTTERLY BIZARRE

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 91: MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT IS STILL ALIVE WHEN YOU ISSUE – AT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL: A SITUATION THAT IS UTTERLY BIZARRE

February 24, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Statements of Truth

The facts in  Amirtharaja & Anor v White & Anor [2021] EWHC 330 (Ch) are unusual to say the least.  Someone who had died two years prior to issue was included as a party in a claim form. The matter…

I WILL WALK 150 MILES:  MARCHING AGAINST CANCER IN MARCH...

I WILL WALK 150 MILES: MARCHING AGAINST CANCER IN MARCH…

February 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Charity

There are few families, or workplaces, that are unaffected by cancer.  Cancer Research UK is organising “Walk All Over Cancer”. Walking 10,000 a steps a day in March.   HOW MANY STEPS IS THAT? It adds up.  According to the…

DAMAGES AND THE SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 4th MARCH 2021

DAMAGES AND THE SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 4th MARCH 2021

February 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Damages, Webinar

This webinar on the 4th March 2021 is part of the Avoiding Pitfalls series. It looks at rules and practice relating to drafting and proving damages in personal injury cases.  The webinar considers schedules of damages and proving damages with…

PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: "THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE... IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK"

PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: “THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE… IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK”

February 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

In  Lynch v Cadwallader & Anor [2021] EWHC 328 (Ch) Chief Insolvency Court Judge Briggs considered the Gestmin principles in a case where a bank failed to establish that a client had signed a guarantee. It is a good example…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 90: APPEALS, RESPONDENT'S NOTICES AND DENTON

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 90: APPEALS, RESPONDENT’S NOTICES AND DENTON

February 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure

The Court of Appeal judgment in Unite the Union v Alec McfAdden [2021] EWCA Civ 199 highlights the needs for a party, responding to an appeal, to file a Respondent’s Notice if it wants to argue there are additional, or…

ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL-HEALTH: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT HEARING SHOULD GO AHEAD: A TRIAL SHOULD BE "FAIR IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES"

ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL-HEALTH: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT HEARING SHOULD GO AHEAD: A TRIAL SHOULD BE “FAIR IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES”

February 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals

“Applying for an adjournment on the grounds of ill health” is a common (indeed one of the most common) search terms that leads people to this blog.  It is unusual to see a Court of Appeal decision on this issue….

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 89:  THE 2% CAP ON COSTS BUDGETING: SOMETHING TO WATCH OUT FOR

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 89: THE 2% CAP ON COSTS BUDGETING: SOMETHING TO WATCH OUT FOR

February 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting

Some draft orders for CCMCs I have seen recently included, towards the end a provision for the 2% cap on the budgeting process to be be applied.  Anyone faced with such a draft should point to the provisions of CPR…

ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL IS A "LAST RESORT" (AND WILL RARELY OCCUR BECAUSE OF INABILITY OF SPECIFIC COUNSEL TO ATTEND)

ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL IS A “LAST RESORT” (AND WILL RARELY OCCUR BECAUSE OF INABILITY OF SPECIFIC COUNSEL TO ATTEND)

February 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Clinical Negligence, Experts

The judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in  Naylor v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 340 (QB) shows the difficulty of obtaining an adjournment of a trial date.    The judge rejected an application on the grounds of…

"Closing argument was in writing: an eye-glazing, bum-numbing, disc-herniating total of 662 pages (single-spaced, medium-sized font and heavily footnoted)": A good time to repeat one of our favourite cases...

“Closing argument was in writing: an eye-glazing, bum-numbing, disc-herniating total of 662 pages (single-spaced, medium-sized font and heavily footnoted)”: A good time to repeat one of our favourite cases…

February 21, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

Periodically I feel bound to remind people  of the case of The Hearing Clinic (Niagara Falls) Inc -v- Ontario Ltd, Lewis & Lewis 2014 ONAC 5831 (CanLii) a decision of Mr Justice J.W.Quinn.   In the middle of “lockdown”, when we may well…

"TOPSY TURVY STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION": THE CORONAVIRUS ACT DOES NOT ALLOW THE BROADCASTING OF THE COURTS

“TOPSY TURVY STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION”: THE CORONAVIRUS ACT DOES NOT ALLOW THE BROADCASTING OF THE COURTS

February 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus

In Good Law Project Ltd & Ors, R. ( On Application of) v Secretary of State for Health And Social Care [2021] EWHC 346 (Admin) Mr Justice Chamberlain rejected an argument that the Coronavirus Act implicitly gave the courts power…

WHERE HAVE ALL THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES GONE? (2): A LONG TIME MAY NOT BE PASSING (AND SOME - MAYBE NOT SO USEFUL - LINKS)

WHERE HAVE ALL THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES GONE? (2): A LONG TIME MAY NOT BE PASSING (AND SOME – MAYBE NOT SO USEFUL – LINKS)

February 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure

As an update on the decision to move the online version of the Civil Procedure Rules.  David Wolfson QC, (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice) tweeted yesterday that the problem had been recognised “I’ve asked my officials to look at…

WHEN YOUR PLEADED CASE IS DIFFERENT TO YOUR EVIDENCE: YOU ARE TAKING A HUGE GAMBLE (WHICH DIDN'T PAY OFF...)

WHEN YOUR PLEADED CASE IS DIFFERENT TO YOUR EVIDENCE: YOU ARE TAKING A HUGE GAMBLE (WHICH DIDN’T PAY OFF…)

February 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Statements of Case, Witness statements

The judgment of Gavin Mansfield QC (sitting as a High Court judge)  in Puharic v Silverbond Enterprises Ltd [2021] EWHC 351 (QB) highlights the difficulties that can occur if the pleaded case differs from the evidence. Put bluntly running a…

THE TORT OF "BRINGING PROCEEDINGS FOR AN IMPROPER PURPOSE": MAY STILL BE ALIVE, BUT NOT VERY WELL...

THE TORT OF “BRINGING PROCEEDINGS FOR AN IMPROPER PURPOSE”: MAY STILL BE ALIVE, BUT NOT VERY WELL…

February 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Civil Procedure

The judgment of Andrew Lenon QC in  Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 325 (Ch) contains a detailed consideration of the tort of “bringing proceedings for an improper purpose”. This tort (may well) still exist, however…

WHERE HAVE ALL THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES GONE? WHEN WILL THEY EVER LEARN?

February 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure

From the day this blog started there has always been a link to the Civil Procedure Rules.  These were available, in an easily accessible form, on the Ministry of Justice website. They may still be there – but not for…

A "WHOLLY UNRELIABLE" WITNESS IS NOT NECESSARILY A DISHONEST ONE:  ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ACCEPTED BY JUDGE

A “WHOLLY UNRELIABLE” WITNESS IS NOT NECESSARILY A DISHONEST ONE: ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ACCEPTED BY JUDGE

February 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Witness statements

In Brint v Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 290 (QB) HHJ Platts (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected the defendant’s case that a witness who was “wholly unreliable” was also fundamentally dishonest.   “Failing…

CONTRACTUAL CLAIM FOR COSTS CONSTRUED AS BEING COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

CONTRACTUAL CLAIM FOR COSTS CONSTRUED AS BEING COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

February 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Costs

In Criterion Buildings Ltd v McKinsey & Company Inc (United Kingdom) & Anor [2021] EWHC 314 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected a paying party’s argument that it did not have to pay the costs…

1 2 … 205 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2021. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 22,963 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • “BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME”: THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF “SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS”
  • AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND…
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: “DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE”
  • CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 91: MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT IS STILL ALIVE WHEN YOU ISSUE – AT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL: A SITUATION THAT IS UTTERLY BIZARRE

Top Posts & Pages

  • CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 91: MAKE SURE YOUR CLIENT IS STILL ALIVE WHEN YOU ISSUE - AT CERTAINLY AT THE TIME OF TRIAL: A SITUATION THAT IS UTTERLY BIZARRE
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: "DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE"
  • THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND...
  • AN APPLICATION THAT WAS "OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT": NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • I WILL WALK 150 MILES: MARCHING AGAINST CANCER IN MARCH...

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin