Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » gexall » Page 114

WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES AFTER A DEFAULT JUDGMENT 3: A NUANCED APPROACH

August 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Default judgment,, Members Content, Uncategorized

We have looked several times before at the question of what a defendant can argue in relation to damages after judgment has been entered*.  The recent decision of Master Matthews in Merito Financial Services Limited -v- David Yelloly [2016] EWHC…

RE-VISITING WHITEHOUSE -v- JORDAN 1: THESE APPEALS WERE NOT ABOUT CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AT ALL: IT’S ALL ABOUT THE FACTS

August 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The decisions of the Court of Appeal and House of Lords in Whitehouse -v- Jordan are often put forward as seminal cases in the law of clinical negligence.  However these appeals, in reality, were not about issues relating to clinical…

ADVOCACY - THE JUDGE'S VIEW V: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE

ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW V: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE

August 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links, Written advocacy

This series looks at the views from judges around the world and the advice they give to advocates.  Here we look at the article from J. Frederic Voros, jr for the Utah State Bar: To Persuade a Judge, Think Like…

APPLICATION TO DISCLOSE THIRD PARTY FUNDER REFUSED

August 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Third party funding, Uncategorized, Useful links

The opening passages of the judgment of H.H. Judge Keyser Q.C. in Dawnus Sierra Leone Limited -v- Timis Mining Corporation Limited [2016] EWHC B19 (TCC) deal with the issue of disclosure of details of third party funding. KEY POINTS A…

TOO LATE AND TOO LONG: OCEANS APART BUT TWO JUDGES HAVE THE SAME VIEW ON LAWYERS' LATE & LENGTHY SUBMISSIONS

August 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

Some parts of the legal profession do not have a reputation for concision. It is interesting to see similar observations coming from two judges, in two very different jurisdictions, on the same day. “Sly lawyers take advantage of this institutional…

BILLING YOUR OWN CLIENT: FIVE IMPORTANT LESSONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

August 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are number of important lessons to be drawn from the judgment yesterday of Master Gordon-Saker in Rahimian -v- Allan Janes LLP [2016] EWHC B18 (Costs). THE CASE The claimant sought an order that the defendant firm of solicitors deliver…

DELAY AND SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: BALD ASSERTIONS IN AN EXPERT'S REPORT

August 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

The result in Gahir -v- Bansal [2016] EWHC 2041 (QB) (Sir David Eady) is perhaps surprising given the strength of the judge’s observations as to the defendant’s conduct. Despite major unjustified delay an application to set aside a default judgment…

CONSENT ORDERS, CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS, IMPLIED TERMS AND (LET'S BE HONEST) A PRETTY DETERMINED EFFORT TO AVOID PAYMENT

August 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Tobias Haynes from Waterside Legal LLP  for sending me a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Cooke in Hartland -v- Buccament Bay Resort Ltd (7th July 2016) a copy of which is attached to…

ATTRITIONAL WARFARE; UNMERITORIOUS POINTS AND UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH: SO MUCH (AND MORE) IN ONE JUDGMENT

August 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Damages, Default judgment,, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Edis in  Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust makes for uncomfortable reading on the issue of the general attitude of the lawyers towards the conduct of the litigation.   In addition to…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 4: DON'T MAKE ALLEGATIONS OF LYING IF YOU HAVEN'T PUT THEM TO THE WITNESS

August 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The previous posts* on the Arroyo judgment have concentrated, for the most part, on the judge’s criticisms of the evidence of the claimant.  However there is one short passage which illustrates an important principle of litigation – a party cannot…

PROVING THINGS 28: MAKE UNWARRANTED PERSONAL ATTACKS AND USE A "MUD-SLINGING" EXPERT: THAT ALWAYS ENDS WELL

August 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Scott -v- E.A.R. Sheppard Consulting & Civil Engineering Ltd [2016] 1949 (TCC) contains some surprising observations. It also contains important lessons in relation to “conspiracy” theories in litigation and the role of the…

PROVING THINGS 27: BURDENS OF PROOF, HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND…. ATTEMPTED MURDER

July 31, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Daley -v- Bakiyev [2016] EWHC 1972 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone dealt with issues relating to the burden of proof where there very serious allegations.  The fact that a central witness for the claimant did not attend court, and his…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 3: WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY

July 31, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This is the third in the series of posts on the  judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages; the second at the…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 2: EXPERTS, OH EXPERTS.

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the second in the series of posts on the  judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages. Here we look…

THE ARROYO CASE WAS A BIG & COMPLEX ACTION: THE PROBLEMS WERE SIMPLE (AND COMMON) 1: UNCHECKED SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC is 1885 paragraphs long.  The trial lasted from the 15th October 2014 to the 5th March 2015, that is 62 court days.  The judgment actually…

INCREASED COURT FEES FROM THE 25th July 2016: AN OVERVIEW & USEFUL LINKS

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been requests, via twitter, that I publicise the increase in court fees that came into effect on the 25th July.  These are not universal increases (they do not increase issue fees in Part 7 claims for instance -…

UNNECESSARY MATERIAL, DUPLICATION AND INFORMATION OVERLOAD: ANOTHER JUDGE'S LAMENT

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

The observations of Mr Justice Kerr at the end of his judgment in Kimmance -v- General Medical Council [2016] EWHC 1808 (Admin) contains some familiar themes in relation to the preparation of cases: bundles, citations and skeletons. “The parties should…

CLAIMANT ESTOPPED FROM RELYING ON QOCS: THE NEED TO BE ACCURATE

July 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to barrister Matthew White for sending me details and a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Lopez in Price -v- Egbert H Taylor &  Company Limited (16th June 2016).  This is the second judgment in the…

HAS A PART 36 OFFER BEEN BEATEN WHEN THE VALUE OF CURRENCY CHANGES? A HIGH COURT DECISION

July 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt today in Novus Aviation Ltd -v- Alubaf Arab International Bank BSC (c) [2016] EWHC 1937 (Comm) contains some interesting observations on Part 36 offers. KEY POINTS A claimant “beat” its own Part 36 offer…

FAILING TO FILE A COST BUDGET AND REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A HARSH LESSON

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Clinical Negligence, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

If a litigation solicitor is ever given the job of designing wallpaper here are the three key things that should form the recurring motif. The costs budget is due 21 days before the first case management conference. Where the claim…

"SECOND" ACTION FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Wright -v- Barts Health NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1834 (QB) Mr Justice Edis refused the defendant’s application to strike out the claim or for summary judgment on the grounds that the claimant had settled an…

PAYING THE "CORRECT" COURT FEE AND AMENDMENT: AN IMPORTANT CASE REVIEWING THE PRINCIPLES

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Limitation, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

This blog has looked several times* at the cases and principles that have followed the decision in Lewis -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch).   Applications around allegations of failure to pay the correct court fee have  become a new battleground…

REPLIES AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: A PRIMER

July 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

Two recent posts* have highlighted the difficulties that can exist with the filing of Replies and Defence to Counterclaim. Here is a short Primer. A REPLY If the Defence does not contain a counterclaim a Reply is not mandatory.  There…

IF YOU ARE GOING TO DRAFT PLEADINGS THEN DO IT PROPERLY: A REPLY AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM IS NOT A MERE FORMALITY

July 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Case Management, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

A post last month highlighted a case where a defendant obtained judgment in default on a counterclaim. The judge refused to set aside the judgment and, in effect, the claimant’s entire claim failed. There is a clear and obvious need…

PROVING THINGS 26: DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN WHAT YOU CAN REMEMBER AND WHAT YOU NOW THINK YOU DID

July 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There have been a large number of posts on this blog about witness evidence, in particular the way that the courts assess the accuracy of evidence.  A surprising number of these have been in the context of clinical negligence claims….

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: WHY IT CAN BE DANGEROUS FOR A DEFENDANT TO TAKE TECHNICAL POINTS

July 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

The decision of Master Mathews in DB UK Bank Limited -v- Sinclair Solicitors [2015] EWHC B29 (Ch) has today been reported on Bailli.  It is a case that shows the dangers of taking technical points as to service. “if I…

KEEPING PARTIES OUT OF COURT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS : COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

July 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The practice of sending witnesses out of court whilst evidence is being given is extremely rare in civil cases. It was considered by the Court of Appeal in Da Costa -v- Sargaco [2016] EWCA Civ 764. “… whilst there may…

YOU CAN BE A TOUGH NEGOTIATOR- YOU CAN ALSO FALL FLAT ON YOUR FACE: HIGH COURT CASE EXAMINED

July 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Uncategorized

The law of privilege prevents a close study of the negotiation process in most cases. That is why everyone involved in litigation could benefit from reading the judgment today of Mrs Justice Slade in FPH Law -v- Brown [2016] EWHC…

PROVING THINGS 25: ATTEMPTS TO SMUGGLE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS DO NOT HELP (AND CARRY NO WEIGHT)

July 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

 There are interesting observations in the judgment of His Honour Judge Hacon today in Raft Limited -v- Freestyle of Haven Limited [2016] EWHC 1711 (IPEC) in relation to an attempt to avoid a limit on the number of witnesses who…

COSTS BUDGETING – THE KEY DATES: A QUICK REMINDER TO AVOID A SHARP (BUT NOT NECESSARILY SHORT) SHOCK

July 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Uncategorized

You would think that everyone involved in litigation would know that new rules as to cost budgeting came into force on the 6th April 2016. However, judging from some of the blank (and worried) looks I have seen recently when…

WANT TO WORK HARD, WIN AND STILL NOT GET PAID? WHEN THE CFAS DID NOT COVER THE COSTS: BAD NEWS FOR SOLICITORS AND COUNSEL

July 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Warby in Radford -v- Frade [2016] EWHC 1600 (QB) contains an important warning in relation to the construction of CFAs both for solicitors and counsel. KEY POINTS A solicitor entered into a CFA with…

PROVING THINGS 24 : DAMAGES AND THE "BUT FOR TEST": WHEN IT GETS REALLY COMPLEX

July 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment  of Mr Justice Foskett today in Reaney -v- University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1676 (QB) is interesting reading. Not least because the parties could not agree what the Court of Appeal had decided and…

NEW RULES ON COSTS CAPPING

July 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

New rules (The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.2) Rules 2016 were passed yesterday which amend CPR Part 3 in relation to costs capping. They are of relatively limited ambit, applying only to Judicial Review applications.  They replace protective costs orders in…

SWITCHING FROM LEGAL AID TO CFA: THE SUCCESSFUL APPEAL

July 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The saga relating to the assessment of costs where a claimant changed from public funding to a conditional fee agreement has been dealt with many times on this blog*.  All of these issues are now dealt with in the judgment…

CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS: WHEN HAS THE CLAIMANT BEATEN ITS OWN OFFER? AN INTERESTING QUESTION

July 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The judgment of HH Judge Pelling QC in Purrunsing -v- A’Court & Co (a firm) [2016] EWHC 1582 (Ch) considers the impact of interest on a claimant’s Part 36 offer. Should the court simply compare the offer with the sum…

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM NOT SET ASIDE - AN OBJECT LESSON IN STAYING AWAKE IN LITIGATION

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM NOT SET ASIDE – AN OBJECT LESSON IN STAYING AWAKE IN LITIGATION

June 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The decision of Master Matthews today in Goldcrest Distribution Ltd -v- McCole [2016] EWHC 1571 (Ch) provides an object lesson in the need to stay awake to procedural issues throughout litigation. The claimant had a default judgment on a counterclaim…

COSTS BUDGETING & DAVID -v- GOLIATH: DOES IT GIVE THE "LITTLE GUY" A CHANCE?

COSTS BUDGETING & DAVID -v- GOLIATH: DOES IT GIVE THE "LITTLE GUY" A CHANCE?

June 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

Costs budgeting remains highly controversial.  One question that is open to debate is – is it useful?  Its utility may be most apparent in cases where the sizes and resources of the litigants are vastly disparate. (Many personal injury lawyers…

PROVING THINGS 23: SERVING IMPORTANT EVIDENCE LATE

June 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

It is surprising how many posts there are on this blog which deal with the late service of witness evidence.  This is an issue that occurs across the whole spectrum of civil procedure.  The question arose again in the judgment…

PART 36: ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS AND INTEREST

June 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Interest, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Bolt Burdon -v- Tariq [2016] EWHC 1507 (QB) Mr Justice Spencer considered the appropriate approach to additional liabilities where a claimant beats its own Part 36 offer and interest was awarded on a contractual basis.  However the judgment appears…

BREXIT: THE LEGAL CONSEQUENCES: USEFUL LINKS

June 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Brexit, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The vote to leave the EU has legal consequences across a wide range of practice areas. Here I aim to provide links to useful posts and articles that discuss those issues. This post is updated regularly. THE INDIVIDUAL SECTIONS There…

PROVING THINGS 22: DAMAGES, MITIGATION , PART 36 (AND EVEN SOMETHING ABOUT BUNDLES)

June 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal decision today in Pawar -v- JSD Haulage Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 551 contains some important lessons in relation to proving damages, mitigation of loss and Part 36 offers. “The fact that a claimant does not mitigate…

WHO WON? CLAIMANTS GET 33% OF THEIR COSTS AFTER TRIAL

WHO WON? CLAIMANTS GET 33% OF THEIR COSTS AFTER TRIAL

June 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Kupeli -v- Cyprus Turkish Airlines [2016] EWHC 1478 (QB) Mrs Justice Whipple considered issues relating to costs liability after the trial of a preliminary issue. “….there is a world of difference between a case which…

ADVOCACY - THE JUDGE'S VIEW IV: "AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS" (OH AND BEWARE OF "WELL PADDED VANITY")

ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW IV: "AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS" (OH AND BEWARE OF "WELL PADDED VANITY")

June 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links, Written advocacy

In the fourth in this series we are returning to Australia and looking at the guidance given by the Hon Chief Justice Pat Keane in his keynote address to the Australian Lawyers Alliance Queensland State Conference in February 2013. Remember…

SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS AND MISSING DOCUMENTS: WHY IT IS DANGEROUS FOR A DEFENDANT TO ATTEMPT TO STAND ON ITS RIGHTS

June 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

When proceedings are served and key documents are missing it is tempting for a defendant to attempt to stand on its rights and not reply at all to the claim. However the case of Rushworth -v- Harvey [2016] EWHC 1386…

THE HARB CASE: IT'S ALL ABOUT THE EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE MUST "SHOW THEIR WORKINGS"

June 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal judgment in Harb -v- HRR Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdud Aziz [2016] EWCA Civ 556 has attracted a lot of attention because of the comments the Court made about the allegations of judicial bias….

PROPORTIONALITY II (THE EXTENDED ALBUM EDITION)

June 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

The earlier post on the decision in Dr Brian May -v- Wavell Group Plc [2016] EWHC B16 (Costs) outlined the decision in summary.  This is a case that justifies an extended examination. REPRISE Following acceptance of the defendant’s Part 36 offer of…

PROPORTIONALITY: WE WILL, WE WILL ROCK YOU

June 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Jon Lord for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Rowley in Dr Brian May -v- Wavell Group Plc  given today (16/06/2016).  It is another case that centres on proportionality. There was a considerable…

BUNDLES EXHIBITS AND PAGINATION: AVOIDING COSTLY MISTAKES

BUNDLES EXHIBITS AND PAGINATION: AVOIDING COSTLY MISTAKES

June 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Bundles, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

I have given up being surprised that the post on trial bundles and Sedley’s Law is the most read post on this blog.  Day after day, month after month, it draws a regular readership. However, in practical terms, it is…

MY WITNESS STATEMENT WAS DRAFTED BY MY LAWYER: THANK YOU OFFICER

June 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are 909 paragraphs in the judgment of  Mr Justice Wyn Williams in Mouncher -v- The Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2016] EWHC 1367 (QB).  I just want to look at one of them.  This was a case all…

EXTENSION OF THE CLAIM FORM: A RARE SUCCESS FOR A CLAIMANT (BUT IT HAS GOT A LOT TO DO WITH CONDUCT)

June 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

Most cases relating to extensions of time for service for the claim form end badly for the claimant. The decision of Mr Justice Roth in The Khan Partnership LLP -v- Infinity Distribution Limited [2016] EWHC 1390 (Ch) is an exception….

← Previous 1 … 113 114 115 … 141 Next →

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

  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE LAW AND PRACTICE: WEBINAR 24th APRIL 2026
  • EXPERT WATCH 43: WHEN AN EXPERT DOESN’T HAVE “REAL WORLD” EXPERIENCE OF THE MATTERS IN THEIR REPORT – THEY START ON THE BACK FOOT…
  • COSTS BITES 377: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEAD TO IT LOSING ITS RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS?
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 67 : YOU CANNOT RELY ON THE DEFENDANTS’ ALLEGED SILENCE AS AN EXCUSE TO ATTEMPT AN UNPLEADED CASE THROUGH THE BACK DOOR
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

Top Posts

  • THERE MAY BE A LOT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING A PARTY: HOWEVER THE CLAIM WAS STILL PRESENTED IN AN "UNFOCUSED" MANNER: A "MOVEABLE FEAST" IS NOT A WISE WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?
  • COSTS BITES 377: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEAD TO IT LOSING ITS RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS?
  • EXPERT WATCH 43: WHEN AN EXPERT DOESN'T HAVE "REAL WORLD" EXPERIENCE OF THE MATTERS IN THEIR REPORT - THEY START ON THE BACK FOOT...
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 67 : YOU CANNOT RELY ON THE DEFENDANTS' ALLEGED SILENCE AS AN EXCUSE TO ATTEMPT AN UNPLEADED CASE THROUGH THE BACK DOOR

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.