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 125

PROVING THINGS 7: IF YOU DON'T PROVE A LOSS YOU DON'T GET AN ORDER: DIRECTORS DON'T HAVE TO CONTRIBUTE

February 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Insolvency, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This occasional series on the need to prove matters by evidence has covered a wide range of cases.  Today we consider company law and insolvency.  In Grant -v-Ralls [2016] EWHC 243 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden rejected a claim by liquidators…

LATE APPLICATIONS TO AMEND & WITNESS STATEMENTS DELIBERATELY NOT SERVED: THIS DOESN'T END WELL FOR THE DEFAULTING PARTY

February 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Birch -v- Beccanor Limited & Dixon [2016] EWHC 265 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris refused an application for late amendment. He also refused an application to adjourn in circumstances where the defendant had deliberately served witness evidence late. KEY POINTS The…

PROVING THINGS 6:"THAT'S WHAT I ALWAYS DO" & PROVING CAUSATION

February 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

We have looked before at the view that a judge takes of a witness who, honestly, states that they have no recollection of an event but recounts their normal practice.  In Long -v- Wester Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWHC…

THIS IS A SORRY TALE OF WOE:SPECULATIVE SKELETON ARGUMENTS ARE OF NO ASSISTANCE

February 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements, Written advocacy

In Lokhova -v- Tymula [2016] EWHC 225(QB) Mr Justice Dingemans set out a sorry tale of procedural issues in relation to applications in a defamation action. There are important observations in relation to co-operation; service of witness evidence and the…

WHY THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COURT FEES INCREASE SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

If evidence were needed of the profound impact of the increase in court fees in can be found in newspaper articles over the past few days. IT IS JUST ONE CASE The Guardian reported on one case of a social…

THE ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS IN LITIGATION: SUPREME COURT GUIDANCE

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Kennedy -v- Cordia Services LLP [2016] UKSC 6 the Supreme Court made some telling observations relating to expert evidence.  This was in the context of a Scottish case, however the observations are of general importance. THE CASE The Supreme Court…

PROVING THINGS 5: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND FAILING ON CAUSATION

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abdel-Khalek -v- Qazi Ali [2016] EWCA Civ 80 demonstrates both the difficulties of compounding lay and “expert” evidence and how a case can fail on causation. KEY POINTS The burden was on…

MOVING FROM LEGAL AID TO CFAS: THE JUDGMENTS

February 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB see the appeals relating to these cases discussed here The cases surrounding the switch from legal aid to a CFA were reviewed  in my post earlier this week . The full transcripts are now available (I am grateful to Aaron Vodden…

ORDERING A SPLIT TRIAL ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES: A CAUTIONARY TALE

February 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Larkfleet -v- Allison Homes Eastern Limited [2016] EWHC 195 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser made some important observations about the need for total clarity when a court orders the trial of a preliminary issue of law. ‘Preliminary points of law…

PROVING THINGS 4: WITNESSES WHO JUST AREN'T THERE

February 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

We have looked at three recent cases where there was simply not the evidence at court to prove the case.  In Caliendo -v- Mischon De Reya [2016] EWHC 150 (Ch) there is a whole section of the judgment devoted to…

MOVING FROM LEGAL AID TO CFAS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

February 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

NB see the appeals in relation to these issues discussed here . There have been recent developments in relation to the issue of the reasonableness of claimant solicitors moving from legal aid to conditional fee agreements. The first case upholds a…

PROVING THINGS 3: THE COMPLETE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE MEANS THE COURT WILL NOT SPECULATE

February 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Another example of a failure to prove damages can be found in the decision of His Honour Judge Stephen Davies (sitting as a High Court judge) in Fairhurst Developments Limited -v- Collins [2016] EWHC 199 (TCC). KEY POINTS This is…

PROVING THINGS 2: EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES MUST BE PITCH PERFECT

February 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

Another example of the need to prove damages can be seen in the Court of Appeal decision in Gartell & Son (a firm) -v- Yeovil Town Football & Athletic Club Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 62.  It is another case that…

PROVING THINGS 1: CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT NOTICES WILL NOT CUT IT

February 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The really surprising thing about going to court (for some people) is that, you have to prove things.  Judges work on the basis of evidence.  On the whole judges prefer live evidence from witnesses who are cross-examined. I The case…

IN LITIGATION, AS IN LIFE, THINGS WILL GO WRONG: HAVING A STRATEGY IN PLACE

IN LITIGATION, AS IN LIFE, THINGS WILL GO WRONG: HAVING A STRATEGY IN PLACE

February 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There has been a lot of publicity recently about lawyers who have been struck off for, effectively, making things up to cover up mistakes.  In the most recent case a time limit was missed for the First Tier Tribunal and…

THE JUDGE MUST GIVE REASONS FOR ADVERSE FINDINGS (PLUS A QUICK LOOK AT ALLEGED BIAS)

February 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The previous post looked at a Court of Appeal decision where a judgment at first instance was set aside because of a failure to give reasons for disbelieving solicitors. Similar principles applied in the case of The Gulf Agencies Limited…

ALLEGATIONS OF DISHONESTY AGAINST SOLICITORS: CLEAR FINDINGS OF FACT MUST BE MADE

February 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There have been two cases in the past few days where the Court of Appeal have overturned judgments because of a failure to give reasons for findings against solicitors.  In Clydesdale Bank PLC -v- Workman [2016] EWCA Civ 73 findings…

THE MEANING OF THE WORD "CLAIM": A PSYCHOLOGICAL PHENOMENON

February 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Global Flood Defence Systems -v- Johan Den Noort Beheer BV [2016] EWHC 189 (IPEC) His Honour Judge Hacon was considering an issue very specific to the Intellecutal Property Enterprise Court. However the observations are interesting and may be of…

NOT A RACING CERTAINTY BUT INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER

February 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Jockey Club Racehorse Ltd -v- Willmott Dixon Construction Limited [2016] EWHC 167 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart held that a claimant’s Part 36 offer to settle for 95% was a relevant offer and had costs consequences for the defendant. KEY…

A FURTHER GENTLE REMINDER OF YOUR NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION 2: BE CAREFUL ABOUT THE ADDRESS FOR SERVICE

February 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

Now that the gyms are emptying out again this is a good time to provide one of the periodical reminders about the civil litigator’s new year’s resolutions.  Just concentrating upon the address for service. RESOLUTION 2 KNOW THE ADDRESS AND…

WHAT IS A TRIAL? AND WHY DOES IT MATTER?

February 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Pickard -v- Roberts [2016] EWHC 187 (Ch) Mr John Baldwin QC (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division)  had to consider whether a hearing was a “trial” and whether this had any impact upon the decision to…

"NEAR MISS" RULE NO LONGER APPLICABLE: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ON COSTS

February 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Sugar Hut Group Limited -v- AJ Insurance Services [2016] EWCA Civ 46 the Court of Appeal overturned an award of costs made against a successful party. “The Claimants’ recovery exceeded the Part 36 offer by a comfortable margin and…

FAILURES IN DISCLOSURE AND WITNESS EVIDENCE YET SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL

February 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of the Court of Appeal in Sobrany -v- UAB Transtira [2016] EWCA Civ 28 gives rise to a few interesting procedural points. It is worth remarking, however, that many of the difficulties arose because of failures by the…

EVIDENCE AND ACCURACY OF RECOLLECTION: ANOTHER EXAMPLE IN THE HIGH COURT

February 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Jacobs -v- King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2016] EWHC 121 (QB) is another example of a case resting on the accuracy of recollection of a witness.  Further the judge rejected a “statistical”…

SERVICE OF PROCEEDINGS WHEN THEY ARE PUT IN THE BIN: A HIGH COURT DECISION

February 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

In Morby -v- Gate Gourmet Luxembourg IV SARL [2016] EWHC  74 (Ch) Edward Murray (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) considered an issue relating to personal service. “If facts are in dispute, absent special situations, it would…

EVIDENCE, DAMAGES AND A SOLICITOR'S GOODWILL

January 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal decision in Karim -v- Wemyss [2016] EWCA Civ 27 has already received some publicity, involving as it does litigation following the sale of a solicitor’s practice.  However the decision also shows the dangers of not bringing…

EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A RISKY BUSINESS

January 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In Medhi Kohsravi -v- British American Tobacco PLC [2016] EWHC 123 (QB)Sir David Eady stated that he would have set aside an order extending time for service of the claim form. It is a timely warning that obtaining an extension…

PICKING UP BAD CITATIONS: & SKELETON ARGUMENTS – STILL TOO LONG:

January 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

In an afternote to his judgement in Commercial Management (Investments) Ltd -v- Mitchell Design and Construct Ltd [2016] EWHC 76 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart added his voice to the many judges who have commented on the excessive length of skeleton…

COSTS,INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS: (OR "COPPERS COP IT")

January 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Contribution proceedings, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Mohidin -v-Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2016] EWHC 105 (QB) Mr Justice Gilbart carried out an extensive review of the principles relating to contribution proceedings and costs. KEY POINTS Two police officers who had been involved in the…

LATE AMENDMENT ALLOWED: TRIAL DATE MOVED: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

In G -v- Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust Appeal [2016] EWHC 104 (QB) Mrs Justice May granted the claimant permission to amend the Particulars of Claim even though this meant moving a 7 day trial listed in early April…

COURT FEES: LINKS FOR TODAY

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

The links section is an integral part of this blog. For today, however, I wanted to take those links on the issue of court fees and put them in a post of their own.  That is the responses today to…

VARYING JUDGMENT ENTERED BY CONSENT: CAUSATION, APPEALS AND "NEW" EVIDENCE

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Atkins -v- The Co-operative Group [2016] EWHC 80 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone varied  a consent order giving judgment for the claimant on liability.  The appeal against the order was not made until six months after the judgment was entered….

WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: ANOTHER HIGH COURT DECISION

January 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The question of waiving privilege in witness statements has been considered several times on this blog. The case of Commodities Research Unit International (Holdings) Ltd -v- King and Wood Mallesons LLP [2016] EWHC 63 (QB) shows that privilege can be…

KERRY UNDERWOOD ON QOCS: A REVIEW

KERRY UNDERWOOD ON QOCS: A REVIEW

January 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

A review of QOCS, Section 57 and Set off. Kerry Underwood. £25.00. Available online here Qualified one way costs shifting is here to stay.  It may be extended to other areas.  A detailed knowledge of the rules and regulations is…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, "MATERIALITY" & CONSIDERING THE MERITS IN A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL OF RELIEF ALLOWED

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

In Joshi & Welch Limited -v- Tay Foods [2015] EWHC 3905 (QB) Mr Justice Green allowed an appeal where the judge a first instance refused to grant relief from sanctions.  Much centred on the definition of the word “material”.  The…

COSTS AFTER A SPLIT TRIAL: PART 36; UNNECESSARY EXPERT REPORTS; PROPORTIONALITY AND USELESS BUNDLES: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The short judgment of Mr Justice Males in C&S  Associates UK Limited -v- Enterprise Insurance Company PLC [2016] EWHC 67 (Comm) encapsulates many of the problems of contemporary litigation. “It is important that those litigating in this court are aware…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY, ATTENDANCE NOTES AND FINDINGS OF FACT

January 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Mansion Estates Ltd -v- Hayre & Co (A Firm) [2016] EWHC 96 (Ch) His Honour Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) went, carefully, through the principles relating to witness credibility and findings of fact. Given…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

It is now just over 18 months since the Denton decision. Cases in relation to relief from sanction are still being reported regularly.  It is clear that default remains a problem and an issue within the civil courts. Further it…

LORD CHIEF JUSTICE'S REPORT 2015: CIVIL WORK

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The Lord Chief Justice’s Report 2015 covers a number of issues.  Of particular interest to civil practitioners. The Briggs Review is summarised. There is an emphasis on control of litigation costs and court fees “The Jackson review reforms have now…

EVIDENCE, PROOF AND DOCUMENTS: MEDICAL RECORDS NOT DEFINITIVE OF CONDITION

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

The judgment of Mrs Justice Patterson DBE in Hunt -v- Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 47 (QB) is one where the claimant succeeded in establishing negligence on the part of the defendant Trust. However there is an interesting…

PERMISSION NOT GRANTED TO CALL EMPLOYMENT EXPERTS: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine [2016] EWHC 45 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone and Master Leslie considered the rules and case law in relation to the need to call expert witnesses in detail. KEY POINTS The claimants were refused…

JUDGMENT IN OTHER PROCEEDINGS ARE NOT EVIDENCE

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

A short passage in the judgment of Mrs Justice Lang DBE in Daniel -v- St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 23 (QB) highlights the point that the conclusions in other proceedings are not evidence in a civil trial. KEY…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: NO PERMISSION TO SERVE RESPONDENT'S NOTICE LATE

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Pipe -v- Spicerhaart Estate Agents Ltd [2016] EWHC 61 QB Mr Justice Sweeney refused permission to serve a Respondent’s notice late. “Against the background that this is a small claims case, the conduct of the Respondent in relation to…

DECISION NOT TO ADMIT LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the decision in Judges Sykes Frixous -v- Bhabra (CA 14/010/2016).*  This provides another example of a party (unsuccessfully) trying to serve witness evidence late in the day.  There are numerous posts on…

NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AFTER BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Security for Costs, Uncategorized

In Sinclair -V- Dorsey & Whitney (Europe) LLP [2015] EWHC 3888 (Comm) Mr Justice refused an application from relief from sanctions. (I am grateful to Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd for sending me a copy of the transcript). “The starting point is…

ANOTHER CASE OF INDEMNITY COSTS BECAUSE OF A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE

January 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision on Master Simons in Bristow  -v- The Princess Alexander Hospital NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B22 (Costs) contains examples of two mistakes that can be made on assessment of costs. The most telling is the defendant’s failure to respond…

PART 36, THE COMPENSATION RECOVERY UNIT AND COSTS: A SIGNIFICANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Crooks -v- Hendricks Lovell Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 8 the Court of Appeal considered some significant issues in relation to the interrelationship between Part 36 and the CRU situation in personal injury cases. KEY POINTS A claimant who recovered…

A POTENTIAL BENEFICIARY CANNOT BRING AN ACTION ON BEHALF OF AN ESTATE

January 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Parties to actions, Uncategorized

The facts in Haastrup -v- Okorie [2016] EWHC 12 (Ch) are somewhat complex. However they do bring home some important matters in relation to the need to have capacity to bring proceedings on behalf of an estate.  The judgment of…

SERVICE BY EMAIL IS GOOD SERVICE: FAMILY COURT DECISION

January 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Electronic service,, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

Issues of electronic service are still relatively novel.  Some interesting issues were addressed by Mostyn J in Maughan -v- Wilmot [2015] EWHC 29 (Fam).  This is a family case where important observations are made in relation to service by email…

APPLICATIONS FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE MUST BE MADE PRE-ACTION (NOT A GREAT SURPRISE THIS)

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Personal Management Solutions Ltd -v- Gee 7 Group Wealth Limited [2015] EWHC 3859(Ch) Mr Justice Morgan decided that applications for pre-action disclosure must be made pre-disclosure. The court did not have jurisdiction to make such an application once proceedings…

← Previous 1 … 124 125 126 … 148 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

  • COST BITES 427: WHEN A SOLICITOR ABANDONS AN ASSESSMENT: PERSONAL LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW
  • COURT REFUSES PERMISSION TO CHANGE NAME OF THE CLAIMANT AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE DANGERS OF LEAVING THINGS LATE
  • THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON
  • A QUICK REMINDER OF THE CLB WEBINARS NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”: ALSO (AND UNRELATED) SAYING AU REVOIR TO THE LITTLE WHITE DOG
  • SERVICE POINTS 52: $28 MILLION CLAIM LOST BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO SERVE A CLAIM FORM PROPERLY (THESE CAN BE EXPENSIVE MISTAKES…)

Top Posts

COST BITES 426: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK SHOULD PAY COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUING: "THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK IS DESIGNED TO BE DIFFERENT"
THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN COURT: AN INTERESTING PRACTICE DIRECTION FROM THE HIGH COURT IN IRELAND : GOOD ADVICE FOR US ALL
COST BITES 424: A CLAIM FOR 30.5 HOURS IN ONE DAY: A SCHEDULE "SO UNRELIABLE IT CANNOT FORM THE BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT"
ATTEMPTING TO RE-WRITE A DRAFT JUDGMENT: THIS HARDLY EVER (IF EVER) PERSUADES A JUDGE THAT THEY WERE WRONG

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.