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 14
THE LIMITATION PERIOD, PERSONAL INJURY AND THE RESTORATION OF A COMPANY: A HIGH COURT DECISION

THE LIMITATION PERIOD, PERSONAL INJURY AND THE RESTORATION OF A COMPANY: A HIGH COURT DECISION

August 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

In  Holmes v S & B Concrete Ltd [2020] EWHC 2277 (QB)  Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the issues surrounding the claimant’s argument that the limitation period in a personal injury action was suspended when a company was wound up….

EXPERT EVIDENCE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THE TRIAL JUDGE CANNOT OVERTURN CONCLUSIONS OF A "UNCONTROVERTED" EXPERT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

EXPERT EVIDENCE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THE TRIAL JUDGE CANNOT OVERTURN CONCLUSIONS OF A “UNCONTROVERTED” EXPERT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

August 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

NB THIS DECISION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL.  THE COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT IS CONSIDERED HERE. In Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB)  Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the question of the approach of…

PROVING PROPENSITY AND SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

August 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Remote hearings

In the judgment today in R v P (Children: Similar Fact Evidence) [2020] EWCA Civ 1088 the Court of Appeal set out the principles relating to similar fact evidence in civil and family cases.   The case is also an example…

PROVING THINGS 181: THE ART GALLERY, THE MILKMAN AND THE 1992 REGULATIONS...

PROVING THINGS 181: THE ART GALLERY, THE MILKMAN AND THE 1992 REGULATIONS…

August 17, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is rare for this blog to look at Scottish cases. However the judgment of the Sheriff Appeal Court in APPEAL BY ANDREW WRIGHT v NATIONAL GALLERIES OF SCOTLAND [2020] ScotSAC Civ 6 raises an issue that is common to…

COUNSEL'S FEES ARE RECOVERABLE ON A CASE THAT LEAVES THE PORTAL: WHEN A TRAIL OF BREADCRUMBS LEADS NOWHERE

COUNSEL’S FEES ARE RECOVERABLE ON A CASE THAT LEAVES THE PORTAL: WHEN A TRAIL OF BREADCRUMBS LEADS NOWHERE

August 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In the judgment today in Finsbury Food Group Plc v Dover [2020] EWHC 2176 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert rejected the defendant’s arguments that counsel’s fees were not recoverable. “I do not accept that leaving the legal costs of valuing a…

EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE: THE SUPREME COURT CONSIDERS THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHEN TORTURE CANNOT BE PROVEN

EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE: THE SUPREME COURT CONSIDERS THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHEN TORTURE CANNOT BE PROVEN

August 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In the judgment today in  Shagang Shipping Company Ltd v HNA Group Company Ltd [2020] UKSC 34 the Supreme Court sends out a clear message about the use (or rather non-use) of evidence obtained by torture in civil proceedings.  This…

PROVING THINGS 178: PROVING PREJUDICE: THE NEED FOR SPECIFIC EVIDENCE

PROVING THINGS 178: PROVING PREJUDICE: THE NEED FOR SPECIFIC EVIDENCE

August 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Striking out

There is another aspect of the Court of Appeal decision in Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1015 that justifies closer examination.  That is the court’s observations on the judge’s finding of prejudice.  The Court of Appeal…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: COVID AND CONTACT BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILD

CORONAVIRUS LAW: COVID AND CONTACT BETWEEN PARENTS AND CHILD

August 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Coronavirus, Members Content

The number of cases dealing with issues relating to COVID have reduced.  However issues still arise. In the judgement today in  D-S (Contact With Children In Care: Covid-19) [2020] EWCA Civ 1031 the Court of Appeal set out clear principles…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED WHEN JUDGE HAD RESERVATIONS AS TO WHETHER STRIKING OUT ORDER SHOULD EVER HAVE BEEN MADE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED WHEN JUDGE HAD RESERVATIONS AS TO WHETHER STRIKING OUT ORDER SHOULD EVER HAVE BEEN MADE

August 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Barakat v Greycourt Ltd [2020] EWHC 643 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt granted relief from sanctions to an appellant whose appeal had been struck out without notice. One thing of note in this judgment is the order striking out the…

HIGH COURT JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY DEFENDANT'S COSTS

HIGH COURT JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDING THAT THERE WAS NO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY DEFENDANT’S COSTS

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

In Pegg v Webb & Anor [2020] EWHC 2095 (QB) tMr Justice Spencer overturned a finding of a trial judge that a claimant had not been fundamentally dishonest.  The claimant had been dishonest in the failures to give full disclosure…

USING RTA PROTOCOL AND PART 8 PROCEDURE INAPPROPRIATELY DID NOT LEAD TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

USING RTA PROTOCOL AND PART 8 PROCEDURE INAPPROPRIATELY DID NOT LEAD TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Members Content, Striking out

The Court of Appeal today gave judgment in Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1015 and overturned the decision to strike out an action because it had been issued inappropriately using the portal and Part 8…

OPENING LINES OF JUDGMENTS: "DUMB, DUMB, DUMB": "WE SHOULD AVOID DOING DUMB THINGS. ESPECIALLY ONES THAT ARE DUMB"

OPENING LINES OF JUDGMENTS: “DUMB, DUMB, DUMB”: “WE SHOULD AVOID DOING DUMB THINGS. ESPECIALLY ONES THAT ARE DUMB”

July 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content

I often do an annual review of opening lines of judgments.  This review has never had any jurisdictional limits.  For that reason I am able to review the judgment yesterday of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth…

IN-HOUSE COSTS RECOVER ON ASSESSMENT: THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE IS NOT BREACHED

IN-HOUSE COSTS RECOVER ON ASSESSMENT: THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE IS NOT BREACHED

July 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The question on the indemnity principle and in-house lawyers was another costs issue considered by Mostyn J in Kuznetsov, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Camden [2019] EWHC 3910 (Admin). The judge rejected an argument that the successful…

"MY LADY - THE MICROPHONE IS STILL ON": THERE IS A LESSON HERE FOR US ALL ...

“MY LADY – THE MICROPHONE IS STILL ON”: THERE IS A LESSON HERE FOR US ALL …

July 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Members Content

The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in C (A Child) [2020] EWCA Civ 987 is an example of a problem that abounds in these days of remote and “hybrid” hearings. The Court allowed an appeal against a refusal…

HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT CLAIMANT'S PERSONAL INJURY ACTION (AND CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AS WELL)

HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT CLAIMANT’S PERSONAL INJURY ACTION (AND CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AS WELL)

July 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury, Striking out

In Akay v Newcastle University [2020] EWHC 1669 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender upheld an earlier decision that a personal injury action be struck out as an abuse of process.   “If it was to be alleged that the judge failed…

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: EXTENSION OF TIME GRANTED FOLLOWING DEFAULT IN AN EXTRADITION CASE

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: EXTENSION OF TIME GRANTED FOLLOWING DEFAULT IN AN EXTRADITION CASE

July 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Zelenko v Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic of Latvia [2020] EWHC 1800 (Admin) the Administrative Court applied Denton principles to an issue concerning extradition.   THE CASE An order had been made extraditing the applicant to Latvia.  The…

CIVIL EVIDENCE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF: WHEN WHO BEARS THE BURDEN CAN HAVE A MAJOR EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF A CASE

CIVIL EVIDENCE AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF: WHEN WHO BEARS THE BURDEN CAN HAVE A MAJOR EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME OF A CASE

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Emmanuel v Avison & Ors [2020] EWHC 1696 (Ch) contains some interesting observations about the burden of proof.  The burden lay with the claimant, despite the fact that if different proceedings had been…

FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS, PART 36 AND "EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES": A CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION

FIXED RECOVERABLE COSTS, PART 36 AND “EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES”: A CIRCUIT JUDGE DECISION

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to my colleague Erica Bedford for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Godsmark QC in Young -v- AXA Insurance UK Ltd, a copy of which is available here  LN2018-15 Young v AXA Judgment as…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: APPEAL ON POSSESSION ISSUES STAYED BY PD51Z:  NO SALAMI SLICING OF CASES WHERE A LANDLORD IS SEEKING POSSESSION

CORONAVIRUS LAW: APPEAL ON POSSESSION ISSUES STAYED BY PD51Z: NO SALAMI SLICING OF CASES WHERE A LANDLORD IS SEEKING POSSESSION

July 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

In the judgment in TFS Stores Ltd v The Designer Retail Outlet Centres (Mansfield) General Partner Ltd & Ors[2020] EWCA Civ 833 the Court of Appeal (by a majority) stayed a number of appeals, holding that they were possession proceedings…

COUNSEL’S ADVICE IS NOT EVIDENCE: REALLY, ITS NOT.

June 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

There is an interesting consideration of the role of counsel’s advice in the judgment of HHJ Vincent in AZ v BZ (financial remedies appeal) [2020] EWFC 28. In a financial remedies hearing, a judge was wrong to firstly admit, and…

LIFE EXPECTANCY IS RARELY A SIMPLE MATTER OF STATISTICS: APPLYING FOR A "VARIATION" OF DIRECTIONS: YOU SHOULD HAVE APPEALED

LIFE EXPECTANCY IS RARELY A SIMPLE MATTER OF STATISTICS: APPLYING FOR A “VARIATION” OF DIRECTIONS: YOU SHOULD HAVE APPEALED

June 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In the judgment this morning in Chaplin v Ben Pistol Allianz Insurance Plc [2020] EWHC 1543 (QB) Jay J rejected an application by the defendant to rely on expert evidence in relation to life expectancy.    This judgment is important…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: POSSESSION APPEAL HEARD IN STAY PERIOD: JUDGMENT WILL NOT BE GIVEN UNTIL END OF THE STAY

CORONAVIRUS LAW: POSSESSION APPEAL HEARD IN STAY PERIOD: JUDGMENT WILL NOT BE GIVEN UNTIL END OF THE STAY

June 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Coronavirus, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Cavanagh yesterday in  Bromford Housing Association Ltd v Nightingale & Anor [2020] EWHC 1532 (QB) is another variant of the issues relating to the stay of possession proceedings.  In this case the judge declined to…

CORONAVIRUS LAW IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: A HYBRID HEARING WILL NOT BE UNFAIR IF LEADING COUNSEL CANNOT ATTEND IN PERSON

CORONAVIRUS LAW IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: A HYBRID HEARING WILL NOT BE UNFAIR IF LEADING COUNSEL CANNOT ATTEND IN PERSON

June 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Coronavirus, Members Content

In the judgment today in C (Children : Covid-19: Representation) [2020] EWCA Civ 734 the Court of Appeal dismissed an argument that a “hybrid” hearing, to be heard with one side’s leading counsel attending remotely, was unfair.   THE CASE…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: STAY LIFTED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HANDING DOWN APPEAL JUDGMENT

CORONAVIRUS LAW: STAY LIFTED SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF HANDING DOWN APPEAL JUDGMENT

June 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Coronavirus, Members Content

In Copeland v Bank of Scotland Plc [2020] EWHC 1441 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman lifted the stay on possession proceedings for the purpose of handing down a judgment on appeal.   THE CASE The action related to possession proceedings brought…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT

May 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The previous two posts on this blog have been warning against complacency in relation to the Denton principles.  This is the third in that series.  In Magee v Willmott [2020] EWHC 1378 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip allowed an appeal in…

COVID REPEATS 35: EXPERTS: DECLARATIONS OF TRUTH SIGNED RECKLESSLY

COVID REPEATS 35: EXPERTS: DECLARATIONS OF TRUTH SIGNED RECKLESSLY

May 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Problems with experts are very similar across all jurisdictions.   The case of Pabon, R v [2018] EWCA Crim 420 is an illuminating one. A decision of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division it shows the dangers when an expert does not comply…

ACCEPTING AN OFFER DURING A HEARING: CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES, NOT PART 36, APPLY: OFFER DID NOT LAPSE AT THE DOOR OF THE COURT

ACCEPTING AN OFFER DURING A HEARING: CONTRACTUAL PRINCIPLES, NOT PART 36, APPLY: OFFER DID NOT LAPSE AT THE DOOR OF THE COURT

May 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

Offers of settlement can, and often are, made outside the ambit of Part 36.  In MEF v St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust [2020] EWHC 1300 (QB) Mr Justice Morris considered issues relating to late acceptance of offers.  The case shows…

EVALUATING EVIDENCE ON APPEAL: THE APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT READILY DISPLACE THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL JUDGE

EVALUATING EVIDENCE ON APPEAL: THE APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT READILY DISPLACE THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL JUDGE

May 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to  Christopher Kardahji from Irwin Mitchell solicitors  for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Lenord -v- First Manchester Limited [2020] EWHC 982 (QB).  The judgment contains a detailed analysis of the…

AUTOMATIC STAY OF POSSESSION HEARINGS APPLIES TO APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING

AUTOMATIC STAY OF POSSESSION HEARINGS APPLIES TO APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION THIS MORNING

May 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

In London Borough of Hackney -v- Okoro [2020] EWCA Civ 681 the Court of Appeal found that the automatic stay on possession proceedings also applies to appeals against possession orders.     THE CASE The Court of Appeal were asked…

ALDRED -V- CHAM: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED BY THE SUPREME COURT

ALDRED -V- CHAM: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED BY THE SUPREME COURT

May 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In November last year I reported on the case of  Aldred -v- Cham [2019] EWCA Civ 1780, in relation to the recoverability of counsel’s fees in child approval cases. I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose who informs me…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT

May 19, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

High Court decisions in relation to relief of sanctions seem to be coming in pairs.  Yesterday we looked at Depp II v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1237 (QB) today we are looking at the claimant’s successful appeal…

COVID REPEATS 26: YOU HAVE TO PROVE YOU HAVE SUFFERED DAMAGES: FOOTBALL CLUB PITCHES THEIR CASE TOO HIGHLY

COVID REPEATS 26: YOU HAVE TO PROVE YOU HAVE SUFFERED DAMAGES: FOOTBALL CLUB PITCHES THEIR CASE TOO HIGHLY

May 19, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

The next few posts in this series are going to highlight those cases where parties simply failed to prove things at trial (and there are quite a few of these). Today we are looking at  the Court of Appeal decision…

CHALLENGES TO THE VALIDITY OF PRACTICE DIRECTION MADE AS A RESPONSE TO CORONAVIRUS:  THIS IS A PILOT SCHEME

CHALLENGES TO THE VALIDITY OF PRACTICE DIRECTION MADE AS A RESPONSE TO CORONAVIRUS: THIS IS A PILOT SCHEME

May 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Coronavirus, Members Content

In Arkin -v- Marshall [2020] EWCA Civ 620 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that  Practice Direction 51Z  was ultra vires. The Practice Direction which provides for a stay of possession proceedings during the coronavirus crisis was held to…

REMOTE HEARINGS: CHILDREN CASES: GUIDANCE FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL

REMOTE HEARINGS: CHILDREN CASES: GUIDANCE FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL

April 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Coronavirus, Members Content, Remote hearings

Civil litigators may well be able to gain some assistance from the guidance being given in children cases. The Court of Appeal gave judgment today in Re A (Children) (Remote Hearing: Care and Placement Orders). a-children-judgment-300420 [2020] EWCA Civ 583…

IS PD 51Z VALID?  COURT OF APPEAL WILL HEAR CASE ON POSSESSION PROCEEDINGS ON  THE 30th APRIL

IS PD 51Z VALID? COURT OF APPEAL WILL HEAR CASE ON POSSESSION PROCEEDINGS ON THE 30th APRIL

April 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Case Management, Coronavirus, Members Content

The Nearly Legal Housing Law blog reports that the Court of Appeal will hear an appeal on the 30th April as to whether PD 51Z is valid.   THE CASE The appeal is a leapfrogged appeal from a decision of…

SKYPE HEARINGS AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL ARE STEPPING ON THE GAS...

SKYPE HEARINGS AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL ARE STEPPING ON THE GAS…

April 8, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Coronavirus, Members Content, Remote hearings

 Teesside Gas Transportation Ltd v Cats North Sea Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 503 demonstrated that Court of Appeal hearings can take place remotely.   “I have explained how this hearing was undertaken in an attempt to demonstrate the…

DIVISIONAL COURT FINDS THAT EXPERT IN CONTEMPT OF COURT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ERASED FROM MEDICAL REGISTER: “NEW” EVIDENCE ADMITTED

April 8, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of the Divisional Court today in  General Medical Council & Ors v Zafar [2020] EWHC 846 (Admin) provides an interesting sequel to the earlier judgments in relation to contempt of court by a doctor who had been seriously…

COURT OF APPEAL HEAR CASE BY VIDEOCONFERENCING

COURT OF APPEAL HEAR CASE BY VIDEOCONFERENCING

April 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

Fairly soon, I am sure, the holding of hearings remotely will become such a commonplace that they will pass without comment. In the interim, however, it is worthwhile noting that the Court of Appeal heard an appeal on the 26th…

THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE FEES OFFICE CLOSED: EMAIL ADDRESSES TO CONTACT

April 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Coronavirus, Court fees, Members Content

A HCMTS notice states that the RCJ Fees Office is closed.  It gives appropriate email addresses. The Royal Courts of Justice Fees Office will close to the public until further notice (1 April 2020). Court users are advised to contact…

HMCTS GUIDANCE: THE COURT OF APPEAL, HIGH COURT AND SENIOR COURT COSTS OFFICE

April 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

HMCTS has seen out the following guidance in relation to the Court of Appeal, High Court and Senior Court Costs Office. The High Court and Court of Appeal will be covering the following work today (1 April 2020). Court of…

INNOVATIVE APPROACH WHEN PROPOSED APPELLANT UNABLE TO ATTEND COURT

INNOVATIVE APPROACH WHEN PROPOSED APPELLANT UNABLE TO ATTEND COURT

March 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Remote hearings, Written advocacy

In  [2020] EWHC 735 (QB) Mrs Justice Tipples took an innovative approach to the problems caused by a claimant’s inability to attend court because of the coronavirus problems.  The submissions were made by email.   THE CASE The judge was…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: THE STANDARD OF PROOF FOR DISHONESTY:  ALSO DELAY OF 22 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT UNACCEPTABLE

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: THE STANDARD OF PROOF FOR DISHONESTY: ALSO DELAY OF 22 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT UNACCEPTABLE

March 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

In Bank St Petersburg PJSC & Anor v Arkhangelsky & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 408 the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial because of doubts in relation to the trial judge’s findings of fact.  The judge had applied too high…

"STATEMENTS OF CASE PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN CIVIL LITIGATION WHICH SHOULD NOT BE DIMINISHED": THE COURT OF APPEAL AND THE LEARNING ACADEMY

“STATEMENTS OF CASE PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN CIVIL LITIGATION WHICH SHOULD NOT BE DIMINISHED”: THE COURT OF APPEAL AND THE LEARNING ACADEMY

March 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In November 2018 I wrote about the decision of HHJ Klein in  UK Learning Academy Ltd v The Secretary of State for Education [2018] EWHC 2915 (Comm). An appeal from that judgment has been heard, and dismissed, by the Court of Appeal. …

ATTEMPTING TO APPEAL A FINDING OF FACT? SET THIS OUT EXPLICITLY IN THE NOTICE OF APPEAL: CLEAR GUIDANCE FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL

March 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Taylor v Rhino Overseas Inc. [2020] EWCA Civ 353 the Court of Appeal set out guidance for a party attempting to appeal a finding of fact.  The fact that such an appeal is being made must be set out…

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT HAD BEEN FLUSHED OUT AND WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: HIGH COURT ALLOWS APPEAL

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT HAD BEEN FLUSHED OUT AND WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: HIGH COURT ALLOWS APPEAL

March 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

In Roberts v Kesson & Anor [2020] EWHC 521 (QB) Mr Justice Jay allowed a defendant’s appeal and held that the trial judge should have found the claimant to be fundamentally dishonest.   The fact that the claimant had been “flushed…

OUT OF TIME APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF ITS UNDERLYING MERITS: DENTON CONSIDERED

OUT OF TIME APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF ITS UNDERLYING MERITS: DENTON CONSIDERED

March 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

For the second time in two days I am writing about a relief from sanctions case where the court took into account the merits of the underlying case.  Yesterday relief was refused because the court held that the case had…

THAT IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN A "NON-ADMISSION" AND A DENIAL IN A DEFENCE:  THE KEY CASES CONSIDERED

THAT IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A DENIAL IN A DEFENCE: THE KEY CASES CONSIDERED

March 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The discussion yesterday of the decision in Aven & Ors v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd [2020] EWHC 523 (QB) gives rise to review  cases on pleading a defence, in particular the  important distinction between a “denial” and a “non-admission”. It is…

SERVING PROCEEDINGS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSE GOOSE'S APPEAL : THE DANGERS OF OVERLOOKING THE BASIC OBLIGATION TO SERVE

SERVING PROCEEDINGS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSE GOOSE’S APPEAL : THE DANGERS OF OVERLOOKING THE BASIC OBLIGATION TO SERVE

March 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd & Anor v Unknown Persons [2020] EWCA Civ 303 the Court of Appeal upheld the judge’s decision not to grant the claimant any kind of relief due to a failure to properly serve the…

IF THE CAP DON'T FIT A JUDGE DOESN'T HAVE TO ACQUIT: THE ARKIN CAP IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

IF THE CAP DON’T FIT A JUDGE DOESN’T HAVE TO ACQUIT: THE ARKIN CAP IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment today in Chapelgate Credit Opportunity Master Fund Ltd v Money & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 24 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to apply the “Arkin cap” to a party that had been funding litigation. …

JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO STRIKE OUT ACTION AGAINST NON-EXISTENT COMPANY: ALSO GUIDANCE FOR INSURERS ON MOST PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION

JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO STRIKE OUT ACTION AGAINST NON-EXISTENT COMPANY: ALSO GUIDANCE FOR INSURERS ON MOST PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION

February 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Striking out

In the judgment in Cowley v LW Carlisle & Company Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 227 today the Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant’s appeal against an order striking out his claim against one defendant.  At the time the striking out…

← Previous 1 … 13 14 15 … 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 5: PD57AC AND REFERENCE TO DOCUMENTS: WHY LAWYERS NEED TO BE PRISED AWAY FROM THEIR COMFORT BLANKETS
  • THE DEFENDANT WAS OUT OF TIME FOR APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE COURT DID NOT HAVE POWER AT THIS STAGE IN ANY EVENT
  • ACTION STRUCK OUT UNDER CPR 3.4(2)(c) FOR NON COMPLIANCE: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED
  • IS AN APPLICATION VALID IF THE INCORRECT COURT FEE IS PAID? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED…
  • SERVICE POINTS 37 : IS SERVICE ON A P.0. BOX GOOD SERVICE? (OH – AND BY THE WAY – AS IT TURNS OUT – THE CLAIM FORM WAS NEVER, IN FACT, SERVED AT ALL): A BIT OF A SURPRISE FOR THE CLAIMANT AT THE APPEAL STAGE

Top Posts

  • IS AN APPLICATION VALID IF THE INCORRECT COURT FEE IS PAID? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED...
  • ACTION STRUCK OUT UNDER CPR 3.4(2)(c) FOR NON COMPLIANCE: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 5: PD57AC AND REFERENCE TO DOCUMENTS: WHY LAWYERS NEED TO BE PRISED AWAY FROM THEIR COMFORT BLANKETS
  • THE DEFENDANT WAS OUT OF TIME FOR APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE COURT DID NOT HAVE POWER AT THIS STAGE IN ANY EVENT
  • SERVICE POINTS 37 : IS SERVICE ON A P.0. BOX GOOD SERVICE? (OH - AND BY THE WAY - AS IT TURNS OUT - THE CLAIM FORM WAS NEVER, IN FACT, SERVED AT ALL): A BIT OF A SURPRISE FOR THE CLAIMANT AT THE APPEAL STAGE

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.