Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham.
Browse: Home » Amendment
YOU CANNOT USE A REPLY TO PLEAD MATTERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

YOU CANNOT USE A REPLY TO PLEAD MATTERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

February 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Statements of Case, Striking out

About ten minutes ago I sent off the material for a webinar I am giving tomorrow on drafting statements of case. Inevitably, therefore, a new and relevant case arrived on BAILLI* [the material was subsequently amended to include this] . …

RULE CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE IN APRIL 2021(1): VULNERABLE WITNESSES AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

February 2, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil evidence, Rule Changes, Witness statements

There are some rule changes coming into force in April this year, introduced by the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2021, these come into force on the 6th April 2021. AMENDMENT TO THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE The new rules are referred to,…

CLAIMANTS SUED THE WRONG (NON-EXISTENT) DEFENDANT -  AND THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAD EXPIRED: DON'T START BREAKING THE CROCKERY JUST YET

CLAIMANTS SUED THE WRONG (NON-EXISTENT) DEFENDANT – AND THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAD EXPIRED: DON’T START BREAKING THE CROCKERY JUST YET

January 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation

In The 52 Occupiers of the Ceramic Works v Bowmer & Kirkland Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 17 (TCC) District Judge Baldwin considered an application to substitute a defendant after the primary limitation period had expired.  The judge, if anything,…

AMENDING YOUR CASE AND PAYING THE COSTS: JUDGE ORDERS CLAIMANT TO PAY £100,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

AMENDING YOUR CASE AND PAYING THE COSTS: JUDGE ORDERS CLAIMANT TO PAY £100,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

December 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Costs, Interim Payments

The judgment of Mr Justice Pepperall in R.G. Carter Projects Ltd v CUA Property Ltd [2020] EWHC 3417 (TCC) is interesting for a number of reasons.  Firstly it encapsulates the principle that a party amending their pleadings must normally pay…

CORONAVIRUS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE: THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ENDS TOMORROW: REVIEW OF THE CASES

CORONAVIRUS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE: THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ENDS TOMORROW: REVIEW OF THE CASES

October 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus

Practice Direction 51ZA which allows parties to extend time limits for up to 56 days comes to an end on the 30th October 2020.   Unless there is a further rule change then parties can only agree extensions of 28 days. …

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES STRUCK OUT: APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED: CLAIMANT FAILED TO USE THEIR LOAF AS CLAIM IS SLICED...

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES STRUCK OUT: APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED: CLAIMANT FAILED TO USE THEIR LOAF AS CLAIM IS SLICED…

September 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Damages, Striking out, Summary judgment

The judgment of Mrs Justice Jefford in The Leicester Bakery (Holdings) Ltd v Ridge And Partners LLP [2020] EWHC 2430 (TCC) shows the necessity of being able to particularise a claim for damages. What it demonstrates is that, in claims…

LETTER STATING THAT THE DEFENDANT CONSENTED TO SOME AMENDMENTS DID NOT OUST COURT'S JURISDICTION: TRY TO AMEND AT YOUR PERIL

LETTER STATING THAT THE DEFENDANT CONSENTED TO SOME AMENDMENTS DID NOT OUST COURT’S JURISDICTION: TRY TO AMEND AT YOUR PERIL

September 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure

In  Scott & Ors v Singh [2020] EWHC 1714 (Comm) HHJ Eyre QC rejected an argument that a letter stating that the defendants agreed to some proposed amendments by the claimant meant that the court had no jurisdiction to prevent…

AMENDING PLEADINGS? HAVE A DRAFT AT COURT: JUDGE CONSIDERS "CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS" AND A "PARTICULARLY UNFORTUNATE PROCEDURAL LITIGATION HISTORY"

AMENDING PLEADINGS? HAVE A DRAFT AT COURT: JUDGE CONSIDERS “CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS” AND A “PARTICULARLY UNFORTUNATE PROCEDURAL LITIGATION HISTORY”

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications

The judgment of HHJ Gore QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Sivaji v Ministry of Defence [2020] EWHC 2006 (QB) makes interesting reading. It is an object lesson in the need to have an amended pleading to hand…

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO AMEND CLAIM, OR INTRODUCE NEW EXPERT,  WHERE APPLICATION TO ADJOURN BECAUSE OF COVID ALLOWED

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO AMEND CLAIM, OR INTRODUCE NEW EXPERT, WHERE APPLICATION TO ADJOURN BECAUSE OF COVID ALLOWED

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence

In Ludlow -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust & BMI Healthcare Ltd [2020] EWHC 1720 (QB) Mr Justice Jay allowed an application for an adjournment on the grounds that a trial could not take place remotely.  However, he refused the claimant’s…

APPLYING TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE STATUTE AND THE RULES CONSIDERED

APPLYING TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE STATUTE AND THE RULES CONSIDERED

July 8, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Limitation

The rules relating to substituting a defendant after expiry of the limitation period are always a little intimidating. Particularly  when trying to persuade a court to apply them. They were considered in detail in the judgment of Master Shuman in…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: COVID IS NOT GOING TO BE USED AS A REASON TO ALLOW A LATE AMENDMENT TO A DEFENCE

CORONAVIRUS LAW: COVID IS NOT GOING TO BE USED AS A REASON TO ALLOW A LATE AMENDMENT TO A DEFENCE

June 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Coronavirus

In the judgment today in Pearce v East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 1504 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert considered an argument that the Coronavirus epidemic could play a part in the defendant’s application to amend its defence.  …

PLEADING A DEFENCE PROPERLY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DENIAL AND A NON-ADMISSION: HIGH COURT GOES BACK TO BASIC PRINCIPLES

PLEADING A DEFENCE PROPERLY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DENIAL AND A NON-ADMISSION: HIGH COURT GOES BACK TO BASIC PRINCIPLES

March 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Statements of Case

There are some interesting observations about statements of case in the judgment of Mr Justice Warby in  Aven & Ors v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd [2020] EWHC 523 (QB).  This case emphasises the difference between a non-admission and a denial…

JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES IN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 2: THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS!)

JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES IN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 2: THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS!)

January 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure

We are looking again at the decision of HHJ Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Molavi v Hibbert & Ors [2020] EWHC, this time relating to the principles to be considered in relation to joinder of additional parties….

POINTS HAVE TO BE PLEADED: APPLICATION TO AMEND AT TRIAL CORRECTLY DISALLOWED: PLEADINGS ARE THERE TO ENSURE THAT THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF EACH PARTY'S CASE ARE KNOWN

POINTS HAVE TO BE PLEADED: APPLICATION TO AMEND AT TRIAL CORRECTLY DISALLOWED: PLEADINGS ARE THERE TO ENSURE THAT THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF EACH PARTY’S CASE ARE KNOWN

September 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Statements of Case

In  Kensington Mortgage Company Ltd v Mallon & Ors [2019] EWHC 2512 (Ch)  Sir Gerald Barling, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, dismissed an appeal against a judge’s refusal to consider a point that was not pleaded.  The…

AMENDMENT OF CLAIM TO JOIN A NEW PARTY WHEN THERE IS AN ISSUE OVER LIMITATION:  APPEAL AGAINST JOINDER ALLOWED

AMENDMENT OF CLAIM TO JOIN A NEW PARTY WHEN THERE IS AN ISSUE OVER LIMITATION: APPEAL AGAINST JOINDER ALLOWED

September 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Limitation

In Trainer v Cramer Pelmont (a firm) [2019] EWHC 2501 (QB)  Mr Justice Walker examines the provisions of s14A of the Limitation Act in considerable detail.  This is one of those judgments that is likely to be authoritative for years…

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL:  KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE - A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL: KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE – A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

September 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence

Appeals are always difficult.  The appellate court has to be persuaded that the first-instance judge was “wrong”, and this is a fairly rigorous test.  It is made far more difficult if the appellate court is given the wrong documents. Particularly…

RULE CHANGES (109): ELECTRONIC FILING, INCURRED COSTS AND THE CCMC, SMALL CLAIM HEARINGS IN PRIVATE

RULE CHANGES (109): ELECTRONIC FILING, INCURRED COSTS AND THE CCMC, SMALL CLAIM HEARINGS IN PRIVATE

July 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Costs, Costs budgeting, Rule Changes

We are now on the 109th update to the Civil Procedure Rules.  The three points I want to look at in particular are: mandatory electronic filing in the QBD; the costs of the CCMC being clearly categorised as incurred costs;…

DEFENDANT CAN ONLY RESPOND TO THE CASE AS PLEADED: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANTS' ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ISSUES

DEFENDANT CAN ONLY RESPOND TO THE CASE AS PLEADED: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANTS’ ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ISSUES

May 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Statements of Case

There are two judgments on BAILLI this morning in the Glaxosmithkline case where the judge has resisted the claimants’ attempts to widen the scope of their case beyond the pleaded case and the issues set out in a Group Litigation…

FRESH EYES NOT A GOOD REASON FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND: COURT REFUSED CLAIMANT'S LATE APPLICATION TO RE-CAST ITS CASE

FRESH EYES NOT A GOOD REASON FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND: COURT REFUSED CLAIMANT’S LATE APPLICATION TO RE-CAST ITS CASE

April 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Statements of Case

In  Donovan & Anor v Grainmarket Asset Management LLP [2019] EWHC 1023 (QB) Martin Griffiths QC, sitting as a High Court judge, disallowed a late application to amend.  It is another example of an application being made shortly before trial,…

AMENDMENT, FOOTBALL AND THE ALLEGEDLY NEGLIGENT SOLICITOR: SIX KEY POINTS (WITH THE LAST ONE BEING THE MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL)

AMENDMENT, FOOTBALL AND THE ALLEGEDLY NEGLIGENT SOLICITOR: SIX KEY POINTS (WITH THE LAST ONE BEING THE MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL)

April 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Limitation

There are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Jenkins v JCP Solicitors Ltd [2019] EWHC 852 (QB). 1. It provides yet another example of a claimant suing the wrong entity The firm of solicitors…

1 2 … 4 Next →

Copyright

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

Subscribe to Blog via Email

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

Join 22,971 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • “THE DEVELOPING BODY OF LAW AS TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COSTS MANAGEMENT AND DETAILED ASSESSMENT”: INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS AFTER A TRIAL: 90% OF BUDGETED COSTS 70% OF INCURRED COSTS
  • MEDIATION PRIVILEGE UPHELD: “PARTIES MUST BE FREE TO CANDIDLY DISCUSS ALL OPTIONS FOR SETTLEMENT”
  • “BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME”: THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF “SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS”
  • AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND…

Top Posts & Pages

  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: "DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE"
  • THE RULES ARE BACK IN TOWN: ASKING WHERE THEY COULD BE FOUND...
  • AN APPLICATION THAT WAS "OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT": NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
  • "BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME": THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF "SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS"
  • MEDIATION PRIVILEGE UPHELD: "PARTIES MUST BE FREE TO CANDIDLY DISCUSS ALL OPTIONS FOR SETTLEMENT"

Blogroll

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

Books

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

Useful Links

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

Archives

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin