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 15
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…

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES: CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE IN APRIL

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN FOREIGN LANGUAGES: CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE IN APRIL

February 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth

The 113th update to Practice Direction Amendments  introduces important changes to to witness statements in foreign languages  (Coming into force from the 6th April 2020).   CHANGES TO PRACTICE DIRECTION 22 – STATEMENTS OF TRUTH There are amendments and addition…

STRIKING OUT POINTS OF DISPUTE BECAUSE OF LACK OF PARTICULARISATION: PARTIES HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IS IN DISPUTE AND WHY

STRIKING OUT POINTS OF DISPUTE BECAUSE OF LACK OF PARTICULARISATION: PARTIES HAVE TO KNOW WHAT IS IN DISPUTE AND WHY

February 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Members Content

In Ainsworth v Stewarts Law LLP [2020] EWCA Civ 178 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision striking out part of points of dispute. “Common sense dictates that the points of dispute must be drafted in a way which enables…

NO PROTECTIVE COSTS ORDER FOR APPELLANT IN ACCOMMODATION APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

NO PROTECTIVE COSTS ORDER FOR APPELLANT IN ACCOMMODATION APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

February 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment in Swift v Carpenter [2020] EWCA Civ 165 today the Court of Appeal rejected the claimant’s application for a Protected Costs Order. There are important observations on (i) the scope of Protected Costs Orders; (ii) the exercise…

PLEADINGS ARE IMPORTANT: NO LUCK IN TRYING TO ARGUE AN UNPLEADED CASE ON APPEAL: NOT A "DRY, TECHNICAL POINT"

PLEADINGS ARE IMPORTANT: NO LUCK IN TRYING TO ARGUE AN UNPLEADED CASE ON APPEAL: NOT A “DRY, TECHNICAL POINT”

February 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  Kalma & Ors v African Minerals Ltd & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 144 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal brought by unsuccessful claimants.  In the judgment it was observed that the claimants were attempting to run a case…

THE DANGERS OF MAKING ORDERS FOR SPLIT TRIALS: DECISION AT TRIAL SET ASIDE DUE TO A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY

THE DANGERS OF MAKING ORDERS FOR SPLIT TRIALS: DECISION AT TRIAL SET ASIDE DUE TO A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY

February 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Murray today in Sharn Panesar Ltd v Pistachios In The Park Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 194 (QB) illustrates some of the dangers of holding a trial on a preliminary issue. In this case a…

INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT'S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE...

INDEMNITY COSTS ON THE GROUNDS OF CONDUCT: FAILURE TO BEAT A DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER: A GARDEN THAT GETS MORE AND MORE EXPENSIVE…

February 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The Court of Appeal decision in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 114 is the second time this case, about a garden, has been on appeal.   On this occasion the Court of Appeal held that the claimants’ conduct…

JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT - AFTER DEFENCE IS DUE BUT WHEN DEFENCE IS FILED LATE: ISSUE TO BE DETERMINED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT – AFTER DEFENCE IS DUE BUT WHEN DEFENCE IS FILED LATE: ISSUE TO BE DETERMINED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

An earlier post dealt with rule changes that come into force in April in relation to default judgment being entered. The new rules make it clear that judgment cannot be entered if the court has received an acknowledgement of service…

APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT'S DISCRETION EXERCISED AGAINST THE APPLICANT

APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT’S DISCRETION EXERCISED AGAINST THE APPLICANT

February 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Disclosure, Members Content

In Hussain v Medical Defence Union & Anor [2020] EWHC 157 (QB) Clive Sheldon QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application for pre-action disclosure.  This judgment makes it clear that pre-action disclosure is, ultimately, a matter of…

PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

January 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Morrison v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 91 (QB) is another illustration of a party asserting something but having no evidence to support it.  This time it was a defendant whose…

JUDGMENT MUST GIVE REASONS (AND NOT SIMPLY INCORPORATE A SKELETON ARGUMENT): THE BAKERS CAN CHALLENGE THEIR ELECTRICITY BILL

JUDGMENT MUST GIVE REASONS (AND NOT SIMPLY INCORPORATE A SKELETON ARGUMENT): THE BAKERS CAN CHALLENGE THEIR ELECTRICITY BILL

January 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Summary judgment

In Fine Lady Bakeries Ltd v EDF Energy Customers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 87 (QB) Mrs Justice Farbey allowed an appeal against a Deputy District Judge who had granted summary judgment.  The case emphasises the need for a judge…

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR

January 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The Privy Council decision in Attorney General of St Helena v AB & Ors (St Helena) [2020] UKPC 1 is of considerable interest to personal injury practitioners. Issues relating to awards made for pain and suffering are rarely discussed at…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: "WAREHOUSING" A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “WAREHOUSING” A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)

January 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In the judgment today in Alibrahim v Asturion Fondation [2020] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the court should not have struck out a claim that had been left dormant for a period. “Striking out was a…

← Previous 1 … 14 15 16 … 29 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILDREN AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION 2026: WEBINAR 30th JUNE 2026
  • COST BITES 406: CAN A PARTY RECOVER UNNECESSARY COSTS AS DAMAGES? THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN UNNECESSARY SECOND ACTION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • THE WEBINAR ON THE SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: WHAT LITIGATION FIRMS NEED TO KNOW: TOGETHER WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS AND TEMPLATESNOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • COST BITES 405: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT LEAD TO A DEDUCTION OF 45% OF THEIR COSTS? A TOOTH DECISION…
  • SHOULD THE COURT ALLOW A “NEWLY APPOINTED” EMPLOYEE TO REPRESENT A LIMITED COMPANY AT A HEARING?

Top Posts

NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES' COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
A NEW SERIES OF USEFUL ONLINE CALCULATORS FOR LITIGATORS AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION (WITH A 20% DISCOUNT FOR CLB READERS): MAKING IT ALL ADD UP
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT: HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS: KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
COST BITES 404: JUDGE ORDERS DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: PARTIES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH THE PROCESS OF LITIGATION: "THEY SHOULD BE USING NON-COURT BASED DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHEREVER POSSIBLE"
THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS A JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION IN FAVOUR OF A SOLICITOR: THE OMBUDSMAN GOT NOTHING WRONG (QUITE A LOT HERE ABOUT VULNERABLE CLIENTS AS WELL...)

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.