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 97
IDENTIFYING THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY AND MAKING A COSTS ORDER:  PARTIALLY SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT'S APPEAL ALLOWED: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY 60% OF THE COSTS.

IDENTIFYING THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY AND MAKING A COSTS ORDER: PARTIALLY SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED: DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY 60% OF THE COSTS.

April 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Wall v Munday [2018] EWHC 879 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) allowed an appeal in relation to costs.  The judge at first instance had ordered the claimant to pay 80% of the defendant’s costs. That…

NO LUCK WHEN REACHING FOR THE SKY: LITIGANTS SEEKING A SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY FROM THE TRIAL JUDGE GET SHORT SHRIFT

NO LUCK WHEN REACHING FOR THE SKY: LITIGANTS SEEKING A SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY FROM THE TRIAL JUDGE GET SHORT SHRIFT

April 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content

In an earlier post about the case of P (A Child), Re [2018] EWCA Civ 720 we looked at an example where the parties (all the parties in the case) had correctly used the guidance in English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd [2002]…

"UNSATISFACTORY IN TERMS OF PROCEDURAL HISTORY, PREPARATION, PROCESS AND OUTCOME": WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU TAKE LEGAL REPRESENTATION AWAY

“UNSATISFACTORY IN TERMS OF PROCEDURAL HISTORY, PREPARATION, PROCESS AND OUTCOME”: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU TAKE LEGAL REPRESENTATION AWAY

April 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Advocacy, Members Content

John Vater QC, writing on Twitter, has – rightly- categorised the District Judge Read as a “hero”.  When giving judgment in JY v RY [2018] EWFC B16 the judge made a number of telling observations about the profound implications of lack…

LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS AND LATE EVIDENCE: THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO BETTER: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION: A TEXTBOOK EXAMPLE OF WHAT NOT TO SAY AND DO

LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS AND LATE EVIDENCE: THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD DO BETTER: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION: A TEXTBOOK EXAMPLE OF WHAT NOT TO SAY AND DO

April 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements, Written advocacy

In The National Council for Civil Liberties (Liberty), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department & Anor (Procedural Matters) [2018] HC 976 (Admin) the Divisional Court took care to file a supplemental judgment that dealt…

ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE'S VIEW SERIES 3: PART 1:  THERE IS A SPECIAL RING IN HELL FOR A CERTAIN TYPE OF ADVOCATE (& YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE)

ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE’S VIEW SERIES 3: PART 1: THERE IS A SPECIAL RING IN HELL FOR A CERTAIN TYPE OF ADVOCATE (& YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE)

April 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

I had no plans for a further series on judge’s advice advocacy. However my hand was forced. I had to share the talk given by Lord Justice Irwin given to the Professional Negligence Bar Association on the 17th April. It…

VULNERABLE WITNESSES IN THE CIVIL COURTS:  EXISTING GUIDANCE AND THE IICSA RECOMMENDATIONS

VULNERABLE WITNESSES IN THE CIVIL COURTS: EXISTING GUIDANCE AND THE IICSA RECOMMENDATIONS

April 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Advocacy, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The criminal and family courts have developed sophisticated methods for dealing with vulnerable witnesses.  There is relatively little guidance in the civil courts. This was an issue noted yesterday in the interim report of Independent Inquiry Child Sex Abuse. Here…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 6: NON-DISCLOSURE OF A PART 36 OFFER

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 6: NON-DISCLOSURE OF A PART 36 OFFER

April 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This post is caused by some comments on Twitter this evening. A surprising number of cases where parties have, by one method or other, disclosed a Part 36 offer. This has been done by including the offers in the trial…

A JUDGMENT ADJOURNING A TRIAL: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT KNOW WHETHER THE ACTION WAS NECESSARY;  THE TRIAL BUNDLE DID NOT HAVE THE KEY DOCUMENT (AND MORE)

A JUDGMENT ADJOURNING A TRIAL: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT KNOW WHETHER THE ACTION WAS NECESSARY; THE TRIAL BUNDLE DID NOT HAVE THE KEY DOCUMENT (AND MORE)

April 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Mediation, Members Content

The short judgment of Mr Justice Holman in Matthews v Matthews & Anor [2018] EWHC 906 (Fam) looks like a family case. However it is an inheritance claim and contains some surprising revelations. KEY POINTS If you are asking a judge…

NEW INSOLVENCY PRACTICE DIRECTION: CAME INTO FORCE TODAY: WATCH OUT FOR THIS

NEW INSOLVENCY PRACTICE DIRECTION: CAME INTO FORCE TODAY: WATCH OUT FOR THIS

April 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes

I am grateful to barrister Simon Bradshaw for pointing out that there is a new Practice Direction in force in relation to insolvency procedure.  This was introduced today and comes into effect immediately. CHANGES The PD now refers to the…

SERENDIPITY AND THE SECRET BARRISTER: A TALE OF TWO T-SHIRTS

April 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Contest, Charity,, Members Content

I was reminded yesterday that many of the people who read this blog do not have Twitter. They will not therefore know the result of the Secret Barrister T-shirt auction. A tale of high drama, contractual confusion,  and eventual salvation …

SERVICE ON INSURER ALLOWED WHEN DRIVER COULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED: FACT THAT INSURER HAD AN ORDER DECLARING THE POLICY VOID NOT RELEVANT TO THIS ISSUE

SERVICE ON INSURER ALLOWED WHEN DRIVER COULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED: FACT THAT INSURER HAD AN ORDER DECLARING THE POLICY VOID NOT RELEVANT TO THIS ISSUE

April 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Farah v Abdullahi & Ors [2018] EWHC 738 (QB) Master Davison rejected an application by an insurer to set aside an order that allowed service of an unnamed driver upon the insurer.  It was irrelevant that the insurer had obtained…

LEAVE TO APPEAL, APPEAL NOTICES AND THE NEED TO APPLY TO AMEND: COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS CRUCIAL: KNOW THE RULES

April 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Hickey v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2018] EWCA Civ 851 the Court of Appeal set out, in categorical terms, that parties should comply with the provisions relating to permission to appeal. In particular a party cannot…

UNREASONABLE FAILURE TO USE PROTOCOL WILL LEAD TO FIXED COSTS BEING AWARDED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: CPR 44 RULES THE DAY

UNREASONABLE FAILURE TO USE PROTOCOL WILL LEAD TO FIXED COSTS BEING AWARDED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: CPR 44 RULES THE DAY

April 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In Williams v The Secretary of State for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy [2018] EWCA Civ 852 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of the personal injury protocol and fixed costs.  It was held that CPR 44 has sufficient width…

THE SECRET BARRISTER: YOU'VE READ THE BOOK NOW GET THE (SIGNED) T-SHIRT: AUCTION FOR CHARITY

THE SECRET BARRISTER: YOU’VE READ THE BOOK NOW GET THE (SIGNED) T-SHIRT: AUCTION FOR CHARITY

April 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Contest, Charity,, Members Content

It is rare for a book about law to hit the best seller lists.  It is even rarer for a law book to have merchandising. The Secret Barrister’s book, however, has produced a limited number of T-Shirts.  To raise money…

PROVING THINGS 90 :  THE TATTOO ARTIST & THE CACTUS SHOP: PRICK ME ONE MORE TIME

PROVING THINGS 90 : THE TATTOO ARTIST & THE CACTUS SHOP: PRICK ME ONE MORE TIME

April 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content

The opportunities for puns arising out of the issues in Martinez (t/a Prick) & Anor v Prick Me Baby One More Time Ltd (t/a Prick) & Anor [2018] EWHC 776 (IPEC) are obvious (and indeed are mentioned in the judgment itself)….

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -v- CHANNEL 5 3: WHY A DEFENDANT SHOULD ALWAYS FILE A COSTS BUDGET:  A REMINDER OF THE RULES

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -v- CHANNEL 5 3: WHY A DEFENDANT SHOULD ALWAYS FILE A COSTS BUDGET: A REMINDER OF THE RULES

April 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The final part of this trilogy on the judgment today in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) shows why the defendant will be kicking themselves for not filing a costs budget.   Some defendants are fairly…

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 2:  CLAIMANTS FAILED TO BEAT PART 36 OFFER, NO GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM NORMAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 2: CLAIMANTS FAILED TO BEAT PART 36 OFFER, NO GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM NORMAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES

April 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This is the second post about the decision on costs in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch). Here we look at the issue relating to Part 36.  The defendant had made a Part 36 offer….

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 1: THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO MEDIATE

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 1: THE ALLEGED FAILURE TO MEDIATE

April 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

The judgment on costs issues  today in  Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch) covers a number of issues. I am dealing with each distinct issue in a separate post. The first deals with costs following…

THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content

Judgments dealing with payments on account of costs are rare, but illuminating.  Particularly when the costs budget is taken as the starting point. There is a detailed consideration of this issue in Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Sarens (UK) Ltd [2018]…

LIEN, THE SOLICITOR AND THE INSURER: NO SAFE HAVEN FOR DEFENDANTS

LIEN, THE SOLICITOR AND THE INSURER: NO SAFE HAVEN FOR DEFENDANTS

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Access to justice, Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of the Supreme Court this morning in Gavin Edmondson Solicitors Ltd v Haven Insurance Company Ltd [2018] UKSC 21. It confirms that solicitors are entitled to costs in cases where the defendant’s insurer, knowing of the solicitor’s involvement,  settled…

WHEN THE LIMITATION ACT IS NOT YOUR BEST FRIEND: "SHEER  INCOMPETENCE" DOES NOT PERSUADE A COURT TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION

WHEN THE LIMITATION ACT IS NOT YOUR BEST FRIEND: “SHEER INCOMPETENCE” DOES NOT PERSUADE A COURT TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Striking out

CPR 17.(4) is always one of the most “challenging” sections of the Limitation Act in practice. Amending the name of a party after the expiry of the limitation period is not always easy.  The judgment in Best Friends Group & Anor…

MAKING UNWARRANTED ASSERTIONS LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS – AGAINST A SECRETARY OF STATE

April 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are numerous cases where the courts have considered conduct that leads to indemnity costs. In Secretary of State for the Home Department v Barry [2018] EWCA Civ 790 the Court of Appeal found that the Home Department’s conduct of an…

PROVING THINGS 89: AN APPROACH THAT IS JUST DANGEROUS: ABDICATION OF THE LAWYER'S ROLE TO AN EXPERT

PROVING THINGS 89: AN APPROACH THAT IS JUST DANGEROUS: ABDICATION OF THE LAWYER’S ROLE TO AN EXPERT

April 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Credibility of experts, Damages, Experts, Members Content

This is the third post today on Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd [2018] EWHC 812 (QB). The case demonstrates an approach to a claim for damages that is simply dangerous: asserting a claim for damages where there is no  adequate evidence…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 5: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES: NOT A NUMBER-CRUNCHING EXERCISE

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 5: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES: NOT A NUMBER-CRUNCHING EXERCISE

April 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Damages, Members Content, Schedules, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth

If there is anything that suffers from being taken for granted it is the basic schedule and counter-schedule. This is demonstrated in the judgment available today in Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd [2018] EWHC 812 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip. The appeal…

DEFENDANT FAILS TO OBTAIN FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: DEFENDANT'S APPEAL DISMISSED:  A BADLY THOUGHT OUT AND POORLY DRAFTED SCHEDULE

DEFENDANT FAILS TO OBTAIN FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL DISMISSED: A BADLY THOUGHT OUT AND POORLY DRAFTED SCHEDULE

April 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

In Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd [2018] EWHC 812 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip refused the defendant’s appeal in a case where it was argued that the trial judge should have made a finding of fundamental dishonesty.  The claimant had not…

LISTING - WAITING TWO YEARS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: 10 MONTHS TO HEAR AN APPLICATION: THIS IS NOT A MODERN JUSTICE SYSTEM

LISTING – WAITING TWO YEARS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: 10 MONTHS TO HEAR AN APPLICATION: THIS IS NOT A MODERN JUSTICE SYSTEM

April 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Adjournments, Civil Procedure, Listing, Members Content

I’m quite happy to carry on posting about listing issues.  Litigants should not suffer in silence.  I post these three reports without comment. Delay of 10 months for listing of applications “Fast track personal injury claim in Central London County…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 4: WHAT NOT TO PUT IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: "INADMISSIBLE AND IRRELEVANT OPINION, SUBMISSION, SPECULATION AND INNUENDO"

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 4: WHAT NOT TO PUT IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: “INADMISSIBLE AND IRRELEVANT OPINION, SUBMISSION, SPECULATION AND INNUENDO”

April 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

This is a very basic point. A witness statement should consist of evidence.  That principle is often breached in interlocutory applications, as we have seen.  However when a lawyer does this, or allows it to happen, in a witness statement…

SERVICE BY TEXT: ALLOWED IN AN EXCEPTIONAL CASE

SERVICE BY TEXT: ALLOWED IN AN EXCEPTIONAL CASE

April 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The facts in NPV v QEL & Anor [2018] EWHC 703 (QB) were exceptional.  However it does show that in some circumstances the courts will allow service by text. THE CASE The claimant was applying for an injunction to prevent alleged…

WHEN FACT FINDING GOES WRONG: APPEALS TO THE COURT OF APPEAL WHEN THERE ARE DELAYS BY THE JUDGE

WHEN FACT FINDING GOES WRONG: APPEALS TO THE COURT OF APPEAL WHEN THERE ARE DELAYS BY THE JUDGE

April 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am going to leave it to the family law bloggers to analyse all the implications of the judgment in P (A Child), Re [2018] EWCA Civ 720. It involves all parties in a case agreeing that the fact finding process at…

ATTEMPTING TO RELY ON MATTERS WHERE PERMISSION TO AMEND HAD BEEN REFUSED: A BRIDGE TOO FAR

April 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Amendment, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Sarens (UK) Ltd [2018] EWHC 751 (TCC) the court rejected an attempt by a party to argue a case which had not been pleaded.   The defendant had been refused permission to amend its defence and counterclaim…

COURT LISTING - JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT IT COULDN'T GET ANY WORSE

COURT LISTING – JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT IT COULDN’T GET ANY WORSE

April 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Case Management, Listing, Members Content

I wasn’t planning a regular series on the vagaries of court listing.  I post these without comment. Both from Twitter today. Parties not told of an adjournment Barrister Banter  ‏@balchinlawyer 11 So at Court to discover case was adjourned a week ago…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 3: THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 3: THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH

April 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Useful links, Witness statements

The aim of this series is to look at things that litigators do every day – almost automatically. Signing a statement of truth is one of those things.  This is a regular occurrence in many solicitor’s offices.  It is a…

PROVING THINGS 88: MATTERS YOU HAVE TO PROVE IF YOU WANT AN INJUNCTION: THE IMPACT OF A SIX MONTH DELAY IN APPLYING

PROVING THINGS 88: MATTERS YOU HAVE TO PROVE IF YOU WANT AN INJUNCTION: THE IMPACT OF A SIX MONTH DELAY IN APPLYING

April 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content, Witness statements

In Blade Motor Group Ltd v Reynolds & Reynolds Ltd [2018] EWHC 497 (Ch) an applicant for an injunction failed because it failed to prove the basic requirements.  The fact that there was a six-month delay in applying for the injunction…

PROBLEMS WITH LISTING: A CONTINUING SAGA

PROBLEMS WITH LISTING: A CONTINUING SAGA

April 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments, Civil Procedure, Listing, Members Content

Complaints about listing continue. Some are put as comments to the original post on this blog, some use the #courtlisting  hashtag on Twitter.  This is just a flavour of complaints in the last week. Three months to acknowledge receipt of…

THE GAVEL, THE WIG AND THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE:  PERPETUATING INACCURACY IS NOT ITS ROLE

THE GAVEL, THE WIG AND THE MINISTRY OF JUSTICE: PERPETUATING INACCURACY IS NOT ITS ROLE

April 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Members Content

It comes as a surprise to many that judges in England and Wales do not use gavels.  It is a widespread myth. Many images of judges in the media have a judge with gavel in hand. There is a Twitter…

SPEAKING TO YOUR WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF THEIR EVIDENCE: STRIKE OUT DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

SPEAKING TO YOUR WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF THEIR EVIDENCE: STRIKE OUT DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

April 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

An earlier post reported on the decision of the Employment Tribunal in Chidzoy -v- BBC (available here). It illustrates the dangers of a witness talking to anyone in the course of their evidence.  This case emphasises the importance of witnesses not…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 2:  "EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT" OF AN APPLICATION

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 2: “EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT” OF AN APPLICATION

April 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post looked at some of the basic requirements of an application to the court.  Here we look at  the evidence that may be needed in support of an application.  The key point here being “evidence”.  Numerous hours are…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 1: THE HUMBLE APPLICATION: WORDING AND TIMING

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 1: THE HUMBLE APPLICATION: WORDING AND TIMING

April 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content

Last year I was giving an in-house talk at a very prominent firm of litigation solicitors.  The litigation partner present (a person of immense experience) made the point that the firm were continually having talks and education on esoteric and…

CIVIL LITIGATORS AND THE SECRET BARRISTER 5: PUBLIC LEGAL EDUCATION: IT MAY NOT BE A BOON, HOWEVER IT IS PROBABLY A MUST

CIVIL LITIGATORS AND THE SECRET BARRISTER 5: PUBLIC LEGAL EDUCATION: IT MAY NOT BE A BOON, HOWEVER IT IS PROBABLY A MUST

April 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Book Review, Members Content

There is a mug, available online, which reads “Don’t you mistake your Google search for my law degree”.  I am sure that many lawyers have been tempted to purchase a set. The Google search may not be helpful, however a…

ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE'S VIEW SERIES 2 PART 10: EDITED HIGHLIGHTS: AROUND THE WORLD IN 147 DAYS

ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE’S VIEW SERIES 2 PART 10: EDITED HIGHLIGHTS: AROUND THE WORLD IN 147 DAYS

April 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Members Content, Written advocacy

I never planned to write a second series on advice from judges on advocacy. It started with an article from Master Cook and developed from there.This led us to garner advice from judges around the world.  Here are the edited…

THE NEW ELECTRONIC BILL OF COSTS: ONE DAY TO GO: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

THE NEW ELECTRONIC BILL OF COSTS: ONE DAY TO GO: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

April 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Rule Changes, Useful links

The electronic bill of costs will be compulsory from the 6th April. Here are some useful links to help you prepare and survive.  I will add to these if anyone has any particular recommendations.   PRACTICE DIRECTIONS The Practice Direction…

LISTING IN THE COUNTY COURT: AN EVERY DAY STORY OF EVER DAY FOLK: "WE'VE GOT NO JUDGES"

LISTING IN THE COUNTY COURT: AN EVERY DAY STORY OF EVER DAY FOLK: “WE’VE GOT NO JUDGES”

April 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Access to justice, Adjournments, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Problems with listing are one of the hidden problems of civil procedure.  Hearings are listed and then pulled out at the last moment, often after the parties have arrived at court.  This is an issue that should be publicised.  It…

ADVOCACY A JUDGE'S VIEW SERIES 2 PART 9: A SURVIVAL GUIDE TO ADVOCACY: "ATTITUDE IS EVERYTHING IN ADVOCACY

ADVOCACY A JUDGE’S VIEW SERIES 2 PART 9: A SURVIVAL GUIDE TO ADVOCACY: “ATTITUDE IS EVERYTHING IN ADVOCACY

April 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Members Content

Here we look at guidance given in 1998 to lawyers in Canada. Mr Justice Ian Binnie, a judge of the Supreme Court in Canada, was giving the first John Sopinka Advocacy Lecture. As ever the aim is to encourage you…

"PERSUASION": APPLICATIONS & EVIDENCE: ATTEND A COURSE AND SUPPORT CHILDREN'S LITERACY: 18th APRIL 2018 - LINCOLN'S INN

“PERSUASION”: APPLICATIONS & EVIDENCE: ATTEND A COURSE AND SUPPORT CHILDREN’S LITERACY: 18th APRIL 2018 – LINCOLN’S INN

April 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Courses, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

On the 18th April 2018 I am involved in a talk at Hardwicke, in Lincoln’s Inn. With a number of my colleagues  we are talking on “Persuasion” Applications and Evidence for Defendants and Insurers”.  All proceeds go directly to a…

YOU APPEAL DECISIONS NOT REASONS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN RELATION TO AN ARGUMENT THAT DID NOT CHANGE OUTCOME OF THE CASE

YOU APPEAL DECISIONS NOT REASONS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN RELATION TO AN ARGUMENT THAT DID NOT CHANGE OUTCOME OF THE CASE

April 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

In  Civilians v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 690 (QB) Mr Justice Leggatt  rejected the defendant’s application for permission to appeal. The proposed appeal was wholly academic in the sense that it had no impact on the outcome of the case. THE…

CLAIMANTS COSTS REDUCED BECAUSE OF FAILURE ON CERTAIN POINTS: 15% AND 50% REDUCTION

CLAIMANTS COSTS REDUCED BECAUSE OF FAILURE ON CERTAIN POINTS: 15% AND 50% REDUCTION

April 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Civilians v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 690 (QB) Mr Justice Leggatt reduced the costs of the successful party due to the fact that the claimants failed on some issues. THE CASE The claimants had been successful in an action…

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

March 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

On the 18th April 2018 I am,  with a number of my colleagues from Hardwicke, giving a talk on “Applications for Defendants”*.  The judgment this week in St Clair v King & Anor [2018] EWHC 682 (Ch) may well feature.   It…

A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT AN OPEN INVITATION TO TAKE A SECOND BITE AT THE CHERRY: AN OVERUSED TACTIC

A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT AN OPEN INVITATION TO TAKE A SECOND BITE AT THE CHERRY: AN OVERUSED TACTIC

March 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Judgment, Members Content

In Gosvenor London Ltd v Aygun Aluminium UK Ltd [2018] EWHC 227 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser made it clear that draft judgments were not to be taken as an invitation to the parties to embark on a second round of submissions….

MISTAKES, APPEALS, DENTON AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: "JUDGES DIFFER, ONE FROM ANOTHER, IN SMALL, HUMAN, WAYS"

MISTAKES, APPEALS, DENTON AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: “JUDGES DIFFER, ONE FROM ANOTHER, IN SMALL, HUMAN, WAYS”

March 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Litigants in person, Members Content

In EDF Energy Customers Ltd v Re-Energized Ltd [2018] EWHC 652 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) carried out a comprehensive review of the authorities relating to the latitude to be afforded to litigants in person. It…

CIVIL LITIGATORS AND THE SECRET BARRISTER 4: WHY WE CAN'T TRUST THE GOVERNMENT (OR OURSELVES)

CIVIL LITIGATORS AND THE SECRET BARRISTER 4: WHY WE CAN’T TRUST THE GOVERNMENT (OR OURSELVES)

March 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

SB’s book sales plough on. It has reached the top 10 in the best seller list. The Criminal Bar Association have set up a fund to send a copy of the book to every MP. You can donate here.   …

← Previous 1 … 96 97 98 … 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT
  • MAZUR MATTERS 55: THINGS WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (2): WHAT DEGREE OF SUPERVISION IS REQUIRED: THIS "WILL ALWAYS DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES"

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.