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 139

COSTS IN THE SUPREME COURT: NEGLIGENT SOLICITORS ORDERED TO PAY COSTS OF BOTH SIDES

September 18, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

What costs order should the Supreme Court make when an appellant succeeds in establishing that wills are valid despite the fact that they have been improperly executed because of negligence on the part of a solicitor? A pragmatic view was…

CHANGES TO CHANCERY PROCEDURE FROM 1st OCTOBER

September 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

Master Marsh has put out two Practice Notes which deal with changes in Chancery Procedure from the 1st October 2014. The first deals with lodging of documents electronically and in hard copy.  Documents will not be able to be filed…

COSTS CLAIMED AS DAMAGES 2: THE CASE LAW IN DETAIL

September 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Damages, Members Content

I am grateful to P.J.Kirby Q.C. for responding to the previous post on costs claimed as damages.  The situation is far more complex than the passage cited in the Rentokil case suggests. THE ISSUE P.J. asked whether the case of…

WHAT IS THE POSITION WHEN LEGAL COSTS ARE CLAIMED AS A HEAD OF DAMAGES?

September 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content

The case of Rentokil Initial -v- Goodman Derrick LLP [2014] EWHC 2994 (Ch) was looked at in the previous post in relation to evidence.  However it also raised an interesting issue as to the approach a court should take when a…

LITIGATION: EVIDENCE; MITIGATION OF LOSS AND "BLACK BOXES" IN THE EVIDENCE

September 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The case of Rentokil Initial -v- Goodman Derrick LLP [2014] EWHC 2994 (Ch) contains some interesting observations on evidence. In particular what is the position when a party claims privilege and fails to disclose legal advice relating to a settlement…

CORONER'S HEARINGS AND THE USE OF HEARSAY EVIDENCE

September 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content

The Chief Coroner has issued a Law Sheet on the use of Hearsay Evidence in Coroner’s Courts.  It is available here THE KEY POINTS Hearsay evidence is admissible in coroner’s courts. Once it is admitted its value is a matter…

INTERIM COSTS ORDERS: USEFUL GUIDES AND LINKS

September 15, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links

I was asked to speak at the Inaugural meeting of the Yorkshire Branch of the Association of Cost Lawyers recently. One matter that came up in discussion was how rarely applications were made for interim applications for costs.  This can…

CAN YOU GET AN ORDER FOR QOCS TO APPLY ON AN APPEAL? CPR 59.2A CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

September 15, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

In JE -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2014] EWCA Civ 192 the Court of Appeal considered whether a QUOCs type order could be made in the Court of Appeal.  The Court also emphasised the importance of prompt…

LIMITATION IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM: DATE OF ACCRUAL; LATENT DAMAGE AND AMENDING UNDER CPR 17.4.(2): A CASE IN POINT

September 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Interface Europe Ltd -v- Premier Hanks Dyers Ltd [2014] EWHC 2610 (QB) Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the issue of the relevant date of accrual of a cause of action in a breach…

TAKING EVIDENCE; WITNESS STATEMENTS AND NOT MISLEADING THE COURT: BRETT -v- THE SRA CONSIDERED

September 11, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The question of the duties owed by a lawyer to not mislead the court was at the forefront of the decision yesterday in Brett -v- The Solicitors Regulatory Authority [2014] EWHC 2974 (Admin).  This case has obvious and very wide…

SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM TWO DANGEROUS POINTS TO WATCH

September 11, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Useful links

Most of the cases and commentary in relation to service concentrate upon late service of the claim form.  However it is possible to fall foul of the rules and serve the particulars of claim late even when the claim form…

E-BUNDLE PRACTICE DIRECTION FROM BIRMINGHAM MERCANTILE COURT: THE SHAPE OF THINGS TO COME

September 9, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

I posted yesterday on the new procedure for e-bundles in the House of Lords and Privy Council. HH Simon Brown QC has sent me a cop of the e-court direction that applies in the Birmingham Mercantile Court. It probably reflects…

COSTS AFTER VARIATION OF A PART 36 OFFER TO BE LESS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE RECIPIENT: BURRETT -v- MENCAP CONSIDERED

September 9, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury

The decision of District Judge Ackroyd in Burreett -v- Mencap Ltd (14th May 2014) was reported on Lawtel earlier this week and is available on Bailli. It contains an important lesson to both defendants and claimants as to costs when…

E-BUNDLES COMING TO THE SUPREME COURT AND PRIVY COUNCIL VERY, VERY SOON

September 8, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

The Supreme Court  has issued guidance on the use of electronic bundles which will be mandatory for a trial period. Parties given permission to appeal in the Supreme Court and Privy Council after the 1st October 2014 will be expected…

MATTERS LEADING UP TO THE MAKING OF A WITNESS STATEMENT MAY NOT NECESSARILY HAVE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS IMMUNITY: COULD YOU BE CROSS-EXAMINED ON THE WAY YOU TOOK A WITNESS STATEMENT?

September 7, 2014 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Statements made in the course of proceedings are usually subject to judicial proceedings immunity.  The scope and extent of this immunity was considered in detail by the Court of Appeal in Singh -v- Governing Body of Moorlands Primary School [2013]…

DURRANT CASE BACK IN THE REPORTS: WHAT PRESUMPTIONS SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW WHEN A PARTY IS DEBARRED FROM CALLING WITNESSES?

September 1, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Durrant  -v- Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary [2013]  EWCA Civ 1264 was well known as one of the first reports on sanctions. The defendant police authority was debarred from calling witness evidence as a result…

THE RISK OF INDEMNITY COSTS: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO TELL YOUR CLIENT?

August 31, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The idea of costs budgeting was, in part at least, to give the parties some certainty as to the costs they would have to face it they lost an action.   However the decision in  Kellie & Kellie -v- Wheatley &…

COSTS BUDGETING: CONDUCT, INDEMNITY COSTS AND PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT: KELLIE -v- WHEATLEY CONSIDERED

August 29, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We looked at the decision in Kellie & Kellie -v- Wheatley & Lloyd Architects Ltd[2014] EWHC 2866(TCC) yesterday in the context of drafting witness statements.  The judgment is equally interesting on the issue of costs and costs budgeting. There is an…

A WORKING EXAMPLE OF THE DANGERS OF NOT TAKING A FULL WITNESS STATEMENT: DISASTER CAN STRIKE

August 29, 2014 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The decision of Judge Keyser Q.C. In Kellie & Kellie -v- Wheatley & Lloyd Architects Ltd [2014] EWHC 2866(TCC)  gives a working example of the dangers of not taking a full witness statement and exploring issues of importance with a…

PROTOCOL FOR THE INSTRUCTION OF EXPERTS: THE NEW BITS

August 27, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content

There has been much coverage of the forthcoming changes to the guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims.  There have been several additions which impose specific duties upon solicitors.  SOLICITOR MUST MAKE POSITION CLEAR IF FURTHER DOCUMENTS ARE…

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: GUIDANCE FROM DOWN UNDER

August 27, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links, Witness statements

Recent posts have given rise to a international tour searching out guidance for the preparation and drafting of witness statements. We have been to Scotland, and to the East, and now we arrive in Australia where the Western Australian Bar…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND COMPLYING WITH THE RULES: WHY WITNESS STATEMENTS CAN COME TO GRIEF

August 24, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The case of Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Ltd (in administration) v. UBS AG [2014] EWHC 2450 (Comm) contains yet another example of the very real dangers of using a witness statement to argue a case.  It is usually unhelpful and often…

WITNESS STATEMENTS; WITNESSES; EVIDENCE AND PSYCHOLOGY: GUIDANCE FROM THE EAST

August 22, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The post yesterday looked at guidance on taking witness statements from Scottish Judges. Here we look at a real gem of an article by Ula Cartwright-Finch and Alex Waksman of Herbert Smith Freehills on the accuracy of witness statements and…

ANOTHER RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS CASE – ANOTHER CONSERVATIVE MP: RELIEF GRANTED AFTER FAILURE TO SERVE NOTICE OF FUNDING

August 22, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Relief from sanctions was granted to the claimant in Ye0 MP -v- Times Newspapers Ltd [2014] EWHC 2853 (QB). THE ACTION This was a defamation action where the claimant had failed to file notice of funding with the Particulars of…

THE PROCESS OF TAKING WITNESS STATEMENTS: GUIDANCE FROM ACROSS THE BORDER

August 21, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is relatively little guidance to litigators on the process of taking witness statements. What are appropriate questions and, to what extent, can the witness be “guided” by the lawyer.  These are difficult and sensitive topics which have been considered…

CIVIL EVIDENCE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS – HERE’S THE CATCH: THE JUDGE CAN ACCEPT SOME OF THE EVIDENCE SOME OF THE TIME

August 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There have been several posts on this blog in relation to witness evidence and witness credibility.  One important point to note is that a judge is entitled to find that a witness is correct on some matters and not on…

APPEALS: STAY OF EXECUTION AND CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY APPELLATE COURT: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES

August 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The fact that an appeal is made, or permission to appeal is granted, does not automatically grant a stay of execution.  The appellant has to apply for a stay and the court can grant conditions.  The law and principles governing…

DENTON APPLIED IN THE TAX & CHANCERY CHAMBER: LEEDS -v- COMMISSIONERS CONSIDERED

August 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

One of the places where Mitchell, and subsequently Denton, had a major impact was the specialist tribunals. As we have seen in this blog Mitchell principles were applied with some vigour and the “clarification” by Denton has also had an effect….

A 20 DAY TRIAL WHEN THE CASE WAS ALL ABOUT ONE WITNESS: WOULD THIS CASE BE ANY DIFFERENT TODAY?

August 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Expert evidence, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Witness statements

Back in 2003 Chris Evans, the radio presenter, was involved in a lengthy contractual dispute with a number of defendants.  There were 9 parties to the action and the trial went on for twenty days. The judge’s observations at the…

PART 36 OFFERS AND NON-MONETARY CLAIMS: A HIGH COURT CASE CONSIDERED

August 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Risks of litigation

We have looked before at the advantages to a claimant in making an early Part offer. If the claimant matches or beats that offer at trial then there are advantages in costs and interests. There can also be a 10%…

MORE ABOUT TRIAL BUNDLES: MOST OF THE STUFF IN THEM IS USELESS (APPARENTLY)

August 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

The decision discussed earlier today of Dowdall -v- William Kenyon & Sons Ltd [2014] EWHC 2822 (QB) contained an interesting observation that I wanted to deal with separately. It concerns the “usefulness” of trial bundles. OBSERVATIONS ON THE BUNDLES The Claimant has…

SECOND ACTION AFTER SETTLEMENT NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: SECTION 33 APPLICATION ALLOWED: DOWDALL CONSIDERED IN DETAIL

August 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Second set of proceedings

The case of Dowdall -v- William Kenyon & Sons Ltd [2014] EWHC 2822 (QB) decided yesterday contains some important observations in relation to allegations of abuse of process; estoppel and section 33. THE FACTS Mr Dowdall has pleural mesotheliomia. In 2003…

FAILURE TO SERVE NOTICE OF AMENDED CFA DETAILS IS NOT A SERIOUS OR SIGNIFICANT BREACH: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED IN DETAIL

August 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The High Court decision in Ultimate Products Ltd -v- Wooley [2014] EWHC 2706 (Ch) provides further guidance as to what the courts are likely to consider “serious or significant” breaches. The High Court judge upheld the decision of the Master…

CIVIL EVIDENCE: WITNESS STATEMENTS: PROVING THE EXISTENCE OF AN ORAL CONTRACT

August 6, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I have written before about witness evidence and the difficulties in establishing matters without the benefit of corroboration.  The case of Brogden & Reid -v- Investec Bank Ltd [2014] EWHC 2785 (Comm) reported today illustrates this problem. THE ISSUES: WAS THERE AN…

THE MITCHELL CASE RUMBLES ON: MORE PROCEDURAL ISSUES: SPLIT TRIAL ORDERED

August 4, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I feel almost duty bound to continue to report on the Mitchell case, even if now has limited relevance to the question of sanctions. The latest case management decision offers an interesting decision on whether there should be a split…

DENTON CONSIDERED IN THE TAX TRIBUNAL: ELDER -v- REVENUE & CUSTOMS

August 3, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The Denton case was considered by the First Tier Chamber: Tax Tribunal in Elder -v- Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 728 (TC). Consideration of the Denton principles led to relief being granted.  The decision is, obviously, specific to the rules relating to…

DENTON PRINCIPLES AND EXTENDING TIME FOR APPEALING: COURT OF APPEAL OBSERVATIONS

August 2, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The issue of whether the “Denton” principles applied to applications for permission to appeal out of time were considered briefly by the Court of Appeal in Hart -v- Burbridge [2014] EWCA Civ 992 THE ISSUES The appellants appealed out of…

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN ORDER FOR E-DISCLOSURE: DECISION THAT A PARTY HAD COMPLIED OVERTURNED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

August 1, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Striking out

The first instance decision in  Smailes -v- McNally (Re Atrium Training Service) [2013] EWHC 2882 (Ch) was looked at in detail in a previous post in October last year.  It is worth noting that the Court of Appeal have overturned the…

PROPORTIONATE PENALTY FOR BREACH OF DISCLOSURE OBLIGATIONS: THE AMERICAN APPROACH: MAKE A VIDEO

August 1, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

One of the comments in Denton was that a “strict” construction of Mitchell led to disproportionate results.  A judgment reported this week in Above the Law provides an example of how a judge can attempt to remedy continuous defaults. THE ISSUE:…

DENTON APPLIED: A (VERY) BRIEF REPORT

July 31, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The Denton principles were mentioned, in passing, in the judgment of HHJ Moloney QC In NNN -v- DI [2014] EWHC B14 (QB). The defendant had been in default in serving a list of documents on the claimant.   A peremptory…

QUOCS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: FOUR IMPORTANT ISSUES: WAGENAAR CONSIDERED

July 31, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The decision of the Court of Appeal in Wagenaar -v- Weekend Travel Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1105 was reported today. It contains important observations  and decisions on qualified one way costs shifting, something that is likely to become a major…

PRINCIPLES OF MITIGATION OF LOSS & THE CREDIBILITY OF EXPERT WITNESSES: A HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

July 31, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Liability, Members Content

The case of Hirtenstein -v- Hill Dickinson LLP [2014]  EWHC 2711 (Comm) where judgment was given today contains many interesting lessons for those involved in professional negligence litigation in particular.   Here I just want to concentrate upon two: (i)…

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: "4 GOLDEN RULES" DIRECTLY FROM THE JUDGES WHO HEAR THE CASES

July 28, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

 I have recommended before that litigators read the guidance for litigants in person. It provides useful insights for most litigators and covers most aspects of civil procedure. It is written by six Circuit Judges so it can be safely assumed…

GUIDELINES ON HOURLY RATES: NOT MUCH HAS CHANGED: NEED FOR MORE RESEARCH

July 28, 2014 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Useful links

The long awaited (and long delayed) guidance on hourly rates has been published. The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary commentary and guidance can be found here. The Committee’s letter to the Master of the Rolls is here The response of the…

LITIGATION AFTER JACKSON (POST DENTON EDITION): 12 POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE

July 26, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Useful links, Witness statements

In August last year I wrote Litigation after Jackson a  10 point Survival Guide.  All of the points made in that post remain valid. I have added another 2 to deal with the situation post -Denton. The biggest danger, post…

DENTON APPLIED IN THE TAX TRIBUNAL: NO PERMISSION TO APPEAL THREE YEARS LATE

July 25, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The Mitchell and Denton cases were reviewed by Judge John Brooks in Meah -v- The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2014] UKFTT 708 (TC).  The proposed appellant was three years late.  The refusal of permission to appeal out of…

WHAT CAN THE DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES AFTER A DEFAULT JUDGMENT 2: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

July 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

We have looked before at the question of what a defendant can argue in relation to damages after a judgment has been entered. A case reported today examines this issue in relation to judgment in a clinical negligence action. SYMES -V-…

POST DENTON RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL IN THE HIGH COURT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED: "UNREASONABLE" DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS

July 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

I am grateful to Ashley Pratt of St James Chambers for his note of the decision of Mr Justice King in Johnson -v- Bourne Leisure on the 21st July 2014. King J granted relief from sanctions and allowed an appeal from the…

CLAIM FORMS: DECLARATION THAT STEPS TAKEN CONSTITUTE GOOD SERVICE: NEW HIGH COURT CASE CONSIDERED

July 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the decision in Tanweer T/A the Auto Service Centre -v- UK Insurance  & National Insurance & Guarantee Corp (Judge Mackie QC) QBD Merc 18/07/2014.  The case is briefly reported and I hope…

THERE ARE DANGERS IF YOU ARE LEAVING THE ISSUE OF COSTS TO THE JUDGE: IN ANY EVENT BE QUICK AND BE CHEAP!

July 22, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

There are limited number of cases where the parties can agree everything except who should pay the costs.  There are dangers in leaving the question of costs to the judge, as the case of  Spiller -v- Derhalli [2014] 2548 (EWHC)…

← Previous 1 … 138 139 140 … 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 423: THE JUDGE'S EYEBROWS ARE RAISED AT AN ADDITIONAL £2,500 BECAUSE THE KC HAS TO STAY FOR THE AFTERNOON...
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"
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN COURT: AN INTERESTING PRACTICE DIRECTION FROM THE HIGH COURT IN IRELAND : GOOD ADVICE FOR US ALL
THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON
COST BITES 424: A CLAIM FOR 30.5 HOURS IN ONE DAY: A SCHEDULE "SO UNRELIABLE IT CANNOT FORM THE BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT"

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