Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Appeals » Page 11

THE GOOD LAW PROJECT JUDGMENT TODAY – TWO PROCEDURAL ISSUES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS & THE COURT’S APPROACH TO UNCHALLENGED WITNESS EVIDENCE

January 18, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal judgment today in The Good Law Project, R (On the Application Of) v Minister for the Cabinet Office [2022] EWCA Civ will, no doubt, be subject to much legal, and political, scrutiny.  Here I want to…

SERVICE WITHOUT A SMILE: CLAIMANTS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: SENDING AN UNSEALED CLAIM FORM IS NOT GOOD SERVICE, THE CLAIMANTS COULD NOT RELY ON CPR 3.10

SERVICE WITHOUT A SMILE: CLAIMANTS COME TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: SENDING AN UNSEALED CLAIM FORM IS NOT GOOD SERVICE, THE CLAIMANTS COULD NOT RELY ON CPR 3.10

January 13, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Service of the claim form

The first (but probably not the last) case on service of the claim form arrives in January, with the Court of Appeal decision in  Ideal Shopping Direct Ltd & Ors v Mastercard Incorporated & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 14.  It…

REVIEW OF 2021 (2): CIVIL LITIGATION CASE OF THE YEAR: MOTHER AND CHILD DO NOT BECOME HOMELESS AFTER SUCCESSFUL APPEAL

REVIEW OF 2021 (2): CIVIL LITIGATION CASE OF THE YEAR: MOTHER AND CHILD DO NOT BECOME HOMELESS AFTER SUCCESSFUL APPEAL

December 29, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Williams v Nilsson & Anor [2021] EWHC 3184 (Ch) HHJ Richard Williams (sitting as a High Court judge) allowed an appeal in a case relating to ownership of property. There is plenty about procedure and evidence in this case,…

SOLICITOR AND OWN COSTS ASSESSMENT: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION THAT CLIENT NOT LIABLE TO PAY ADDITIONAL COUNSEL'S FEES: SOLICITOR TERMINATED THE RETAINER AND COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS

SOLICITOR AND OWN COSTS ASSESSMENT: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION THAT CLIENT NOT LIABLE TO PAY ADDITIONAL COUNSEL’S FEES: SOLICITOR TERMINATED THE RETAINER AND COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS

December 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I wrote about the first instance decision in Murray v Richard Slade And Co Ltd [2021] EWHC 3383 (QB), in two posts in January this year, the first is here, the second here.  The claimant in that case (the solicitor…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 92: RESILING FROM ADMISSIONS - A SUMMARY OF THE LAW

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 92: RESILING FROM ADMISSIONS – A SUMMARY OF THE LAW

December 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Appeals, Members Content

The judgment of Master Stevens in  Shah v London Borough of Barnet [2021] EWHC 2631 (QB) provides an essential summary of the rules and case law in relation to resiling from admissions.   The decision itself was looked at in an…

IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT UNENFORCEABLE IF THE SOLICITOR BREACHES THE CODE OF CONDUCT? MUCH TO THINK ABOUT?

IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT UNENFORCEABLE IF THE SOLICITOR BREACHES THE CODE OF CONDUCT? MUCH TO THINK ABOUT?

December 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Trower in Winros Partnership v Global Energy Horizons Corporation [2021] EWHC 3410 (Ch) gives much for  lawyers to think about.  Here I want to concentrate on one element  of that judgment- does a failure to…

ROUTE OF APPEAL FROM COMMITTAL DECISIONS IN THE DIVISIONAL COURT: GO TO THE SUPREME COURT DIRECTLY

ROUTE OF APPEAL FROM COMMITTAL DECISIONS IN THE DIVISIONAL COURT: GO TO THE SUPREME COURT DIRECTLY

December 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Committal proceedings, Members Content

The observations at the end of the Divisional Court judgment in National Highways Ltd v Buse & Ors [2021] EWHC 3404 (QB) are of some interest. The Court held that the appropriate route to appeal committal decisions made in the…

THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL CAN AWARD COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: APPEAL ON THIS ISSUE COMPROMISED

December 14, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In October 2020 I wrote about the case of  SRA -v- Ahmud where the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal were highly critical of the steps taken by the SRA in investigating and bringing a claim alleging dishonesty.  That case has a short coda in…

CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: A PARTY MORE INTERESTED IN APPEALING A COURT ORDER THAN COMPLYING WITH ITS TERMS...

CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: A PARTY MORE INTERESTED IN APPEALING A COURT ORDER THAN COMPLYING WITH ITS TERMS…

December 3, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  Day v Womble Bond Dickinson (UK) LLP [2021] EWHC 3236 (QB) Deputy Master Toogood refused a claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when there had been a four month delay in applying for permission to amend the Particulars of…

A DEFENDANT CAN RARELY (IF EVER) COMPEL A CLAIMANT TO JOIN OTHER DEFENDANTS TO AN ACTION: COURT OF APPEAL EXTRACTS CLAIMANT FROM A DIFFICULT SITUATION

A DEFENDANT CAN RARELY (IF EVER) COMPEL A CLAIMANT TO JOIN OTHER DEFENDANTS TO AN ACTION: COURT OF APPEAL EXTRACTS CLAIMANT FROM A DIFFICULT SITUATION

December 2, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

In  Pawley v Whitecross Dental Care Ltd & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1827 the Court of Appeal overturned an order that allowed a defendant to add additional defendants to a claim.  Making such an order exposed the claimant to the…

SKELETON ARGUMENTS: NOT TOO LONG, NOT TOO SHORT: MISSIVE FROM THE HIGH COURT: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THEM "JUST RIGHT"

SKELETON ARGUMENTS: NOT TOO LONG, NOT TOO SHORT: MISSIVE FROM THE HIGH COURT: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THEM “JUST RIGHT”

December 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Written advocacy

In Overd & Ors v The Chief Constable of Avon And Somerset Constabulary [2021] EWHC 3100 (QB) Mr Justice Linden reminded advocates of the guidance relating to skeleton arguments. One was too long, the other too short.     THE…

TRIALS ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES, CALDERBANK OFFERS AND COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REJECT SUBMISSION THAT "WOULD REPRESENT THE ANTITHESIS OF GOOD POLICY" & "REWARD BAD BEHAVIOUR"

TRIALS ON PRELIMINARY ISSUES, CALDERBANK OFFERS AND COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REJECT SUBMISSION THAT “WOULD REPRESENT THE ANTITHESIS OF GOOD POLICY” & “REWARD BAD BEHAVIOUR”

November 29, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In the judgment in  McKeown v Langer [2021] EWCA Civ 1792 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that a Calderbank offer had the same effect as a Part 36 offer when a court was considering the issue of costs…

ARE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM PROPERLY SERVED IF SENT  (AT THE 12th HOUR) IN THE POST WITH THE CLAIM FORM? CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION ON APPEAL

ARE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM PROPERLY SERVED IF SENT (AT THE 12th HOUR) IN THE POST WITH THE CLAIM FORM? CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION ON APPEAL

November 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

I am grateful to barrister  Christopher Johnson for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Ralton in the case of Ellis -v- The Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary (HHJ Ralton, 16th November 2021).  The judge was…

SETTING ASIDE A JUDGMENT OBTAINED BY FRAUD: "MAINTAINING THE LIE ALL THE WAY TO THE COURT OF APPEAL"

SETTING ASIDE A JUDGMENT OBTAINED BY FRAUD: “MAINTAINING THE LIE ALL THE WAY TO THE COURT OF APPEAL”

November 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

The Court of Appeal judgment in Park v CNH Industrial Capital Europe Ltd (t/a CNH Capital) [2021] EWCA Civ 1766 contains an important discussion of the circumstances in which it is possible to bring a second action to set aside…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: COMMITTAL APPLICATIONS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY SPECIAL RULES

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: COMMITTAL APPLICATIONS ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY SPECIAL RULES

November 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Loveridge & Anor v Loveridge [2021] EWCA Civ 1697 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that should be no order for costs following the withdrawal of committal proceedings.  The Court also allowed costs on the indemnity basis from…

MODERN SLAVERY AND THE LIABILITY OF AN INSURER: COURT REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT INSURERS ARE LIABLE TO INDEMNIFY "EMPLOYERS" IN MODERN SLAVERY CASE

MODERN SLAVERY AND THE LIABILITY OF AN INSURER: COURT REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT INSURERS ARE LIABLE TO INDEMNIFY “EMPLOYERS” IN MODERN SLAVERY CASE

November 24, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury

In the decision today in Komives & Anor v Hick Lane Bedding Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 3139 (QB) Mrs Justice May refused the claimants’ appeal on the issue of whether an insurer was entitled to avoid an employer’s liability…

DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN APPLICATION TO APPEAL OUT OF TIME : PERMISSION GRANTED

DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN APPLICATION TO APPEAL OUT OF TIME : PERMISSION GRANTED

November 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Kumar v Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy & Anor [2021] EWHC 2965 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber considered the Denton principles in an application for permission to appeal out of time.  The appellant’s application was granted….

PROVING THINGS 218: THE NEED TO PROVE CAUSATION IN ADDITION TO BREACH OF DUTY

PROVING THINGS 218: THE NEED TO PROVE CAUSATION IN ADDITION TO BREACH OF DUTY

November 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury

The Court of Appeal judgment in Cunningham v Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council [2021] EWCA Civ 1719 highlights the need to prove issues of causation in addition to breach of duty. THE CASE The claimant is a teacher who was attacked…

COURT OF APPEAL GUIDANCE ON REDACTION OF DOCUMENTS: OBJECTIONS SHOULD BE MADE WELL AHEAD OF TRIAL

November 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

In Promontoria (Oak) Ltd v Emanuel & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1682 the Court of Appeal set out some guidance in relation to the approach of the courts when documents are redacted. In particular issues relating to redaction should not…

THE COURT OF APPEAL AND FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED EVEN THOUGH NO FORMAL APPLICATION WAS BEFORE THE COURT

THE COURT OF APPEAL AND FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED EVEN THOUGH NO FORMAL APPLICATION WAS BEFORE THE COURT

November 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  the judgment in  Boodia v Yatsyna [2021] EWCA Civ 1705 the Court of Appeal allowed a decision that a Circuit Judge had made with a heavy heart.  The judgment reviews the cases in relation to non-payment, or late payment,…

THE INTOXICATED PASSENGER AND ESTABLISHING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

THE INTOXICATED PASSENGER AND ESTABLISHING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

November 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Campbell v Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1698 the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a claimant could be contributory negligent even when drunk.  However it is important that the facts of this case are looked…

SOLICITOR SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN COMPELLED TO ATTEND COURT TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION

SOLICITOR SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN COMPELLED TO ATTEND COURT TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION

November 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

In Hunt v Annolight Ltd & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1663 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that a solicitor should be compelled to attend court to give evidence in a wasted costs application. “Any requirement for a solicitor…

EXCEPTIONS TO THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT'S APPEAL DISALLOWED: JUDGE ENTITLED TO FIND THAT EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLIED

EXCEPTIONS TO THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL DISALLOWED: JUDGE ENTITLED TO FIND THAT EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLIED

November 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

A case, newly arrived on BAILII today relates to whether a District Judge was correct to award costs outside the fixed costs regime. In Lloyd 2 Sisters Poultry Ltd (Costs) [2019] EW Misc 18 HHJ Howells refused a defendant’s appeal…

FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: A CLAIM FOR SERVICES CAN BE BASED ON THE COSTS OF COMMERCIAL REPLACEMENT - WITHOUT DISCOUNT

FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES: A CLAIM FOR SERVICES CAN BE BASED ON THE COSTS OF COMMERCIAL REPLACEMENT – WITHOUT DISCOUNT

October 29, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision in Steve Hill Ltd v Witham [2021] EWCA Civ 1312    contains an important consideration of the basis upon which claims for loss of services are calculated in a fatal accident case.   FATAL ACCIDENT -…

THE JUDGMENT IN JALLA -V- SHELL: THE JUDGMENT OF LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL: THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FOR DELAY

THE JUDGMENT IN JALLA -V- SHELL: THE JUDGMENT OF LORD JUSTICE UNDERHILL: THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION FOR DELAY

October 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The case of Jalla & Anor v Shell International Trading And Shipping Co. Ltd & Anor (Appeal 3: Refusal to Extend Time) [2021] EWCA Civ 1559 was covered in the previous post.  It is worthwhile looking at the shorter judgment…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO EXTEND TIME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER: 28,000 CLAIMS BITE THE DUST

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO EXTEND TIME FOR COMPLIANCE WITH COURT ORDER: 28,000 CLAIMS BITE THE DUST

October 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In the decision today in  Jalla & Anor v Shell International Trading And Shipping Co. Ltd & Anor (Appeal 3: Refusal to Extend Time)[2021] EWCA Civ 1559 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to grant extensions of time…

INTERPRETERS, REMOTE HEARINGS AND A FAIR TRIAL: HIGH COURT APPEAL DECISION

INTERPRETERS, REMOTE HEARINGS AND A FAIR TRIAL: HIGH COURT APPEAL DECISION

October 27, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Gholizadeh v Sarfraz [2021] EWHC 2814 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles considered the issue of fairness when witnesses, giving evidence remotely, did not use a translator.   We have a situation where the defendant’s representatives stated, openly, prior to trial that…

APPEAL WAS OUT OF TIME DUE TO FAILURE TO USE EFILING: A POINT TO WATCH

APPEAL WAS OUT OF TIME DUE TO FAILURE TO USE EFILING: A POINT TO WATCH

October 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content

The judgment of Eason Rajah QC (sitting as a Judge of the Chancery Division)in  Walker v The Official Receiver [2021] EWHC 2868 (Ch) highlights a problem with appeals in the Chancery Division.  The appellant had problems because an appeal was to…

IN THE RUN UP TO HALLOWEEN: MISSIVES FROM THE BENCH: "THAT ONE'S HALF BLIND AND HALF DEAF. I CALL HIM THE COURT OF APPEAL"

IN THE RUN UP TO HALLOWEEN: MISSIVES FROM THE BENCH: “THAT ONE’S HALF BLIND AND HALF DEAF. I CALL HIM THE COURT OF APPEAL”

October 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

In the run up to Halloween I thought I would repeat some of the “scary” posts on this blog.  Here we look at a post from November 2018, a collection of Twitter comments about judicial interventions. “DJ Tynas at Macclesfield…

WHEN AT COURT MAKE SURE YOU CAN ALWAYS BE FOUND: PROMPTNESS, SETTING ASIDE AND CPR 39.3(5)

WHEN AT COURT MAKE SURE YOU CAN ALWAYS BE FOUND: PROMPTNESS, SETTING ASIDE AND CPR 39.3(5)

October 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

In Altaf & Ors v Close Brothers Ltd [2021] EWHC 2823 (QB) Mr Justice Fordham considered an application made by a defendant who left the court before the trial started.  It highlights the importance of every litigant, once they arrive…

WHEN CAN A COURT TAKE ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES  UNDER A CFA INTO ACCOUNT IN THE AWARD OF DAMAGES?

WHEN CAN A COURT TAKE ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES UNDER A CFA INTO ACCOUNT IN THE AWARD OF DAMAGES?

October 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

Another aspect of the Court of Appeal judgment in Hirachand v Hirachand & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1498 was the Court of Appeal’s consideration of whether it was appropriate for the judge to take into account liabilities for costs under a…

WHY THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES COMMITTEE IS MORE APPROPRIATE THAN THE SUPREME COURT (FROM THE SUPREME COURT)

WHY THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES COMMITTEE IS MORE APPROPRIATE THAN THE SUPREME COURT (FROM THE SUPREME COURT)

October 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is one passage in the Supreme Court judgment in Ho -v- Adelkun [2021] UKSC 43 that makes for interesting reading.  The Supreme Court made it quite clear that, in procedural issues, the Civil Procedure Rules Committee is often a more…

THE CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE: NO INJUSTICE WHEN A DEBARRED PARTY ATTENDED A TRIAL BY SKYPE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

October 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Remote hearings

In Hirachand v Hirachand & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 1498 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that a defendant, who had not filed an acknowledgement of service and had been debarred from taking part in the action, suffered injustice…

PROVING THINGS 217: WHEN AN ACCIDENT IS UNEXPLAINED: RES IPSA LOQUITUR CANNOT ASSIST

PROVING THINGS 217: WHEN AN ACCIDENT IS UNEXPLAINED: RES IPSA LOQUITUR CANNOT ASSIST

October 13, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

The problems of establishing liability when its cause is not certain are set out in the judgment of Mr Justice Robin Knowles in Savigar v Ainscough Crane Hire Ltd [2021] EWHC 2707 (QB).   THE CASE The claimant suffered serious…

THE DENTON CRITERIA: LATE APPEALS, NEW EVIDENCE AND PERMISSION TO APPEAL: A PROPOSED APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO TWO BITES OF THE CHERRY

THE DENTON CRITERIA: LATE APPEALS, NEW EVIDENCE AND PERMISSION TO APPEAL: A PROPOSED APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO TWO BITES OF THE CHERRY

October 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Nagpal v Kumar [2021] EW Misc 17 (CC) illustrates the difficulties faced by a party that requires permission to appeal out of time and wishes to adduce new evidence at the proposed appeal….

GRIFFITHS -V- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 3: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT HAVE A FAIR TRIAL: THE COURTS SHOULD NOT ALLOW LITIGATION BY AMBUSH: THE DISSENTING JUDGMENT

October 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

NB THE DECISION IN THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT. THE SUPREME COURT ESSENTIALLY AGREEING WITH THE DISSENTING JUDGMENT OF BEAN LJ CONSIDERED IN THIS POST. THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS DISCUSSED HERE. This is the third post…

GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL: AN EXPERT'S REPORT WITHOUT REASONING IS "ALL BUT WORTHLESS"

GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL: AN EXPERT’S REPORT WITHOUT REASONING IS “ALL BUT WORTHLESS”

October 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

NB THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT – SEE THE DECISION HERE. This is the second post about the Court of Appeal decision in   Griffiths v Tui (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1442.  Here we…

GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (1): JUDGES AND EXPERTS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP

GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (1): JUDGES AND EXPERTS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP

October 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

NB THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN GRIFFITHS WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT, SEE THE DISCUSSION HERE. This is the first of a series of posts that consider the Court of Appeal judgment in  Griffiths v Tui (UK) Ltd…

WHEN AN EMAIL FROM A SOLICITOR IS EVIDENCE OF LOSS: EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE 3 STAGE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL

WHEN AN EMAIL FROM A SOLICITOR IS EVIDENCE OF LOSS: EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE 3 STAGE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL

October 5, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for bringing my attention to the decision of HHJ Jarman QC in Akram v Aviva Insurance Ltd [2021] EW Misc 16 (CC).  This is a case that highlights the flexibility the courts have…

ASSESSING BILLS OF COSTS: GIVE DETAILS OF THE SIGNATORY AND OF THE FEE EARNERS OR YOUR BILL WILL STRUCK OUT: "AN OUNCE OF OPENNESS IS CHEAPER THAN ANY ARGUMENT"

ASSESSING BILLS OF COSTS: GIVE DETAILS OF THE SIGNATORY AND OF THE FEE EARNERS OR YOUR BILL WILL STRUCK OUT: “AN OUNCE OF OPENNESS IS CHEAPER THAN ANY ARGUMENT”

October 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to solicitor Benjamin T Petrecz  for drawing my decision to the judgment in  Barking, Havering & Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust v AKC [2021] EWHC 2607 (QB) Mrs Justice Steyn (sitting with an assessor Master Brown) allowed…

INTERIM PAYMENTS WHEN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

INTERIM PAYMENTS WHEN THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

September 29, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Interim Payments, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to barrister Michael Lemmy for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment today in Buttar Construction Ltd -v- Arshdeep [2021] EWCA Civ 1408.  The Court considered arguments about whether an interim payment should have…

MISSING WITNESSES: THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE

MISSING WITNESSES: THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE

September 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at the inferences that courts draw when witnesses do not give evidence at court. In Royal Mail Group Ltd v Efobi [2021] UKSC 33 the Supreme Court made it clear that the principles involved…

PEREMEPTORY ORDERS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: MAKING CONCESSIONS AND PUTTING ALL YOUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET

PEREMEPTORY ORDERS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: MAKING CONCESSIONS AND PUTTING ALL YOUR EGGS IN ONE BASKET

September 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There are twp other aspects of the Court of Appeal judgment in Poule Securities Ltd v Howe & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1373 that merit consideration.  Firstly the claimant’s decision to make one application; the second related to concessions made…

CONSTRUING PEREMPTORY ORDERS: THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE IS THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

CONSTRUING PEREMPTORY ORDERS: THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE IS THE DATE FOR COMPLIANCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

September 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

In Poule Securities Ltd v Howe & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1373 the Court of Appeal considered the construction of an “unless” order.  It was held that the date for compliance on the order had to be construed as the…

JUDGE WAS WRONG TO ALLOCATE ACTION TO SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: CLAIMANT SUCCEEDS IN APPEAL AND CASE ALLOCATED TO THE FAST TRACK

JUDGE WAS WRONG TO ALLOCATE ACTION TO SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: CLAIMANT SUCCEEDS IN APPEAL AND CASE ALLOCATED TO THE FAST TRACK

September 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Elias & Anor v Blemain Finance Ltd [2021] EW Misc 15 (CC) HHJ Keyser QC overturned a decision allocation an action to the small claims track. The matter was re-allocated to the fast track. “… it seems to me…

JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO ORDER DEFENDANT TO FACE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION

September 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Part 36

There is another aspect of the judgment in Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) that needs consideration.  The judgment on fundamental dishonesty was considered in the previous post.  The defendant was unsuccessful in their appeal against the…

EXAGGERATION OF INJURIES IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: HIGH COURT DECISION

EXAGGERATION OF INJURIES IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: HIGH COURT DECISION

September 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Elgamal v Westminster City Council [2021] EWHC 2510 (QB) Mr Justice Jacobs rejected an appeal from a defendant that argued the trial judge should have found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. “The Defendant’s argument, based on the word…

DISCUSSIONS TO SELL LAND WERE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AT HEARING: THE WITHOUT PREJUDICE RULE EXAMINED

DISCUSSIONS TO SELL LAND WERE WITHOUT PREJUDICE AND COULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AT HEARING: THE WITHOUT PREJUDICE RULE EXAMINED

September 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

In  Windmill Holdings SPV Ltd v Adams & Anor (LAND REGISTRATION – ADVERSE POSSESSION – evidence) [2021] UKUT 228 (LC)  The Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), Judge Elizabeth Cooke, upheld the decision of the First-tier tribunal excluding certain evidence on the…

SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL:  TRIAL JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO EXERCISE THEIR DISCRETION

SECTION 33 CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: TRIAL JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO EXERCISE THEIR DISCRETION

September 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Blackpool Football Club Ltd v DSN [2021] EWCA Civ 1352 the Court of Appeal considered, and upheld, a decision on Section 33 where the discretion was exercised in favour of the claimant.  This was in the context, however, of…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 3: PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM FIRST INSTANCE JUDGEAFTER ADJOURNMENT

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1ST OCTOBER 3: PERMISSION TO APPEAL FROM FIRST INSTANCE JUDGEAFTER ADJOURNMENT

September 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Rule Changes

The rules  currently provide that application for permission to appeal to the judge who made the decision must be made to the lower court at the hearing at which the decision to be appealed was made. If an application is…

← Previous 1 … 10 11 12 … 28 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

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)

Top Posts

  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: "THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES..."
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE "A GREAT MYSTERY" TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS...)

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.