Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Applications » Page 11
WRITING TO THE JUDGE AFTER THE DRAFT JUDGMENT HAS BEEN SENT OUT: THIS IS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE FURTHER ARGUMENT

WRITING TO THE JUDGE AFTER THE DRAFT JUDGMENT HAS BEEN SENT OUT: THIS IS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE FURTHER ARGUMENT

June 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

There have been a large number of cases where the courts have been critical of attempt to “re-open” judgments at the stage where the draft judgment is circulated.  We see another example here. The judge reviewed the cases on this…

PARTS OF WITNESS STATEMENT STRUCK OUT - THIS "CARRIES NO WEIGHT AS EVIDENCE":DOORS FIRMLY SHUT IN RELATION TO INADMISSIBLE COMMENTARY

PARTS OF WITNESS STATEMENT STRUCK OUT – THIS “CARRIES NO WEIGHT AS EVIDENCE”:DOORS FIRMLY SHUT IN RELATION TO INADMISSIBLE COMMENTARY

June 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

If we had a pound for every word in witness statements served in just one single month that was irrelevant or inadmissible we could probably go a long way to paying off the national debt.  The costs, however, are probably…

THE CLAIMANT DID NOT NEED TO ANSWER THE PART 18 REQUESTS MADE: THESE REQUESTS ARE AKIN TO THE "PRE CPR-PROCEDURE"

THE CLAIMANT DID NOT NEED TO ANSWER THE PART 18 REQUESTS MADE: THESE REQUESTS ARE AKIN TO THE “PRE CPR-PROCEDURE”

June 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

There have been a number of cases recently relating to Part 18 questions and questions to experts.   Here we are looking at a case where the defendant raised numerous requests to the claimant and sought a peremptory order when it…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 14: THE DEFENDANT COULD GIVE EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT WERE NOT PLEADED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 14: THE DEFENDANT COULD GIVE EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT WERE NOT PLEADED

June 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

Today we are looking at a case where the judge rejected an argument that evidence could not be given because the particular issue had not been pleaded.  The judge held that, on the facts of this case, the evidence was…

CAN THE COURT ORDER A CLAIMANT TO DELIVER UP REPLIES TO PART 18 QUESTIONS BEFORE A DEFENCE IS FILED? THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

CAN THE COURT ORDER A CLAIMANT TO DELIVER UP REPLIES TO PART 18 QUESTIONS BEFORE A DEFENCE IS FILED? THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

May 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

There are relatively few cases on procedural issues relating to Part 18.   In this case the judge considered whether the court had power to compel a claimant to reply to Part 18 questions from the defendant before a defence was filed. …

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 13:  INAPPROPRIATE PLEADING OF FRAUD LEADS TO COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 13: INAPPROPRIATE PLEADING OF FRAUD LEADS TO COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

May 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

I am not sure whether there are more cases about pleadings recently, or whether I am noticing them more having started this series.  However issues relating to statements of case keep arising. Here we look at a case where the…

THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO GRANT THE DEFENDANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A "MINI TRIAL"

THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO GRANT THE DEFENDANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A “MINI TRIAL”

May 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Summary judgment, Witness statements

Today we are looking at a case where the claimants were successful on appeal in overturning an order granting the defendant summary judgment.  The case shows the limits of applications for summary judgment, in particular arguments that evidence was not…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 6: HOW IS THE COURT GOING TO APPROACH THE COSTS OF ACCOMMODATION WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS A REDUCED LIFE EXPECTANCY - & HOW DOES THE COURT DEAL WITH THIS ON AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT?

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 6: HOW IS THE COURT GOING TO APPROACH THE COSTS OF ACCOMMODATION WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS A REDUCED LIFE EXPECTANCY – & HOW DOES THE COURT DEAL WITH THIS ON AN APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT?

May 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Interim Payments, Members Content, Personal Injury

The decision in Swift -v- Carpenter set out the approach the courts should normally take when a claimant needs to purchase accommodation because of their injuries.  However that judgment, expressly, left open issues relating to the approach the courts should take…

A SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASE WITH A TWIST IN THE TAIL: AND WHAT A TALE THIS IS...IT LEADS TO A LOT OF WASTED COSTS (AND A POTENTIAL WASTED COSTS ORDER)

A SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASE WITH A TWIST IN THE TAIL: AND WHAT A TALE THIS IS…IT LEADS TO A LOT OF WASTED COSTS (AND A POTENTIAL WASTED COSTS ORDER)

May 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment

Today we are looking at a case about a failure to serve the claim form properly. The claimant did not consider whether they knew, or had served, on the defendant’s “last known residence”.   As a result a default judgment, order…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 11: THE COURT WON'T STRIKE OUT PARTS OF THE DEFENCE BECAUSE... ITS ACTUALLY THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM THAT DON'T MAKE MUCH SENSE

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 11: THE COURT WON’T STRIKE OUT PARTS OF THE DEFENCE BECAUSE… ITS ACTUALLY THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM THAT DON’T MAKE MUCH SENSE

May 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

NB – SEE THE APPEAL JUDGMENT ON ONE ISSUE IN THIS CASE IN Prudence v Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] EWHC 96 (KB) Here we are looking at a judgment that is all about statements of case (or at…

COST BITES 240:  THERE IS NOT A "CATCH 22" POSITION IN RELATION TO THE DRAFTING OF THESE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS

COST BITES 240: THERE IS NOT A “CATCH 22” POSITION IN RELATION TO THE DRAFTING OF THESE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS

May 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are continuing to work through the results of one case in relation to the recoverability of success fees from a client’s damages.  The claimants, seeking to challenge their former solicitors deduction of costs from their damages, argued that the…

PARTS OF A SOLICITORS' WITNESS STATEMENT ARE STRUCK OUT: A REMINDER - A WITNESS STATEMENT IS A PLACE FOR FACTS, NOT OPINION, LEGAL ARGUMENTS OR ATTEMPTS TO GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT IS REALLY THAT SIMPLE

PARTS OF A SOLICITORS’ WITNESS STATEMENT ARE STRUCK OUT: A REMINDER – A WITNESS STATEMENT IS A PLACE FOR FACTS, NOT OPINION, LEGAL ARGUMENTS OR ATTEMPTS TO GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT IS REALLY THAT SIMPLE

May 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are countless posts on this blog where judges have criticised the contents of witness statements.  Here we are looking at a case where the judge struck out parts of a witness statement signed by a solicitor.  Parts of the…

THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT'S COSTS : A "CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT" TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS : A “CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT” TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

May 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is a well known principle that a third party funder can be liable to pay the costs of an action.  However what happens when the funding agreement is dressed up as something else – a car sale for instance? …

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ARGUE ABOUT COSTS (BUT WAS ALLOWED TO ARGUE ABOUT THE WASTED COSTS)

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ARGUE ABOUT COSTS (BUT WAS ALLOWED TO ARGUE ABOUT THE WASTED COSTS)

May 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at another aspect of the case we looked at yesterday.  Most of the attention in that case relates to the fake cases that the claimant relied upon.  However there was criticism of the defendant too.  The…

COST BITES 237: "THROUGHOUT HISTORY, LAWYERS HAVE HAD A BAD REPUTATION": COMMONSENSE AND PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED IN THE FAMILY COURTS

COST BITES 237: “THROUGHOUT HISTORY, LAWYERS HAVE HAD A BAD REPUTATION”: COMMONSENSE AND PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED IN THE FAMILY COURTS

May 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

Why spend £13,000 to recover a remedy that will only be worth £1,500? That is the issue considered by Deputy District Judge Hodgson [Professor David Hodson OBE KC (Hons)].  An application was made late. The gain to the applicant was…

COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT SOLICITORS APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: THE ONGOING CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO SERVE A CLAIM FORM PROMPTLY

COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT SOLICITORS APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: THE ONGOING CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO SERVE A CLAIM FORM PROMPTLY

May 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Summary judgment

The case we are looking at today involves the consequences, for the solicitors, of failing to serve a claim form. In an earlier case extensions of time for service of a claim form were set aside.   The client instructed new…

DOES AN  ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED AND SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED CLAIM FORM REQUIRED RE-SEALING AND FILING PRIOR TO SERVICE? AN IMPORTANT ISSUE CONSIDERED

DOES AN ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED AND SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED CLAIM FORM REQUIRED RE-SEALING AND FILING PRIOR TO SERVICE? AN IMPORTANT ISSUE CONSIDERED

May 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form

If a claimant serves a “amended” claim form that has not been resealed does that amount to good service? That issue was considered in the case we are considering today.  The result is of considerable practical significance. However it pays…

COST BITES 236 : COSTS BUDGETING CAN BE RETROSPECTIVE : BUDGET CONSIDERED FROM THE DATE OF THE CCMC NOT 11 MONTHS LATER

COST BITES 236 : COSTS BUDGETING CAN BE RETROSPECTIVE : BUDGET CONSIDERED FROM THE DATE OF THE CCMC NOT 11 MONTHS LATER

May 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Can the court ever set a costs budget retrospectively?  In this case the judge held that it could, further there were good reasons for doing so in this case.   “I do not accept that the Court is unable to…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 8: "ASSERTED LOSS" DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND THE CLAIM WAS STRUCK OUT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 8: “ASSERTED LOSS” DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND THE CLAIM WAS STRUCK OUT

May 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out, Summary judgment

We are looking at a case where the entire case was struck out on various grounds. The claimant did not attend the hearing to dispute the issues.  However I have isolated one ground of the judgment which relates to a…

NEW EDITION OF THE KINGS BENCH GUIDE: THE GENERAL CHANGES AND THE GUIDANCE ON ANONYMITY ORDERS

NEW EDITION OF THE KINGS BENCH GUIDE: THE GENERAL CHANGES AND THE GUIDANCE ON ANONYMITY ORDERS

May 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a new edition of the King’s Bench Guide.  There are some additions and changes.  In particular the Guide notes the difference between an application for an anonymity order made at an approval hearing and one that is not….

JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: IT IS "INCOHERENT" AND OBSTRUCTS THE JUST DISPOSAL OF THE CLAIM

JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: IT IS “INCOHERENT” AND OBSTRUCTS THE JUST DISPOSAL OF THE CLAIM

April 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Schedules, Summary judgment

It is an easy matter for a claimant to insert a claim for a substantial loss of earnings into a schedule of damages.  However a claimant then has to prove that loss. Further, even prior to trial, a defendant is…

COST BITES 234: A REMINDER THAT A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT CAN SOMETIMES BE AN EXPENSIVE PROCESS FOR A CLAIMANT

COST BITES 234: A REMINDER THAT A SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT CAN SOMETIMES BE AN EXPENSIVE PROCESS FOR A CLAIMANT

April 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

A central aim of this series is to look at what actually happens when costs are assessed.  We see an example in the case we are looking at here.  It was the claimant’s application for a Solicitors Act assessment of  bills…

DEFENDANT GRANTED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DEFENCE : "I AM IN NO DOUBT THAT I SHOULD GRANT THE RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION OF OF ONE DAY..."

DEFENDANT GRANTED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DEFENCE : “I AM IN NO DOUBT THAT I SHOULD GRANT THE RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION OF OF ONE DAY…”

April 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Ahmad v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2025] EWHC 936 (Pat) Mr Justice Mellor granted the defendant an extension of one day to file a defence, this had the effect of making the defendant’s applications to strike…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AFTER BREACHING A PEREMPTORY ORDER AND FAILING TO PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO CONTINUE (IN PART)

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AFTER BREACHING A PEREMPTORY ORDER AND FAILING TO PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO CONTINUE (IN PART)

April 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

We are looking again at the judgment in  Michele Carrington v American International Group UK Limited [2025] EWHC 1010 (TCC).  This time in relation to the issue of relief from sanctions.  The claimant had failed to comply with a peremptory order  to…

COST BITES 232: COSTS JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A "SHORT CUT" TO APPROVAL OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS FROM A PROTECTED PARTY'S DAMAGES

COST BITES 232: COSTS JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT THERE SHOULD BE A “SHORT CUT” TO APPROVAL OF SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT COSTS FROM A PROTECTED PARTY’S DAMAGES

April 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Personal Injury

A solicitor who wishes to deduct “solicitor and own client” costs in a case involving a minor or protected party requires approval by the Court.  Here we have a case where the claimant’s solicitors argued, robustly, that the current process…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 7: "THE CLAIMANT AND WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO PLEAD SUCH A CLAIM IN BROAD AND VAGUE TERMS": A CLAIMANT HAS TO PLEAD HOW THE ALLEGED BREACHES HAVE CAUSED THE ALLEGED LOSS

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 7: “THE CLAIMANT AND WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO PLEAD SUCH A CLAIM IN BROAD AND VAGUE TERMS”: A CLAIMANT HAS TO PLEAD HOW THE ALLEGED BREACHES HAVE CAUSED THE ALLEGED LOSS

April 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we are looking at an application that was all about the claimant’s inadequate pleadings. After putting the defects right (at at third attempt)  the case was allowed to proceed – but it was a lengthy and expensive process for…

ADDING AN ADDITIONAL PARTY TO A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE TEST IS THAT OF DESIRABILITY RATHER THAN NECESSITY

ADDING AN ADDITIONAL PARTY TO A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD: THE TEST IS THAT OF DESIRABILITY RATHER THAN NECESSITY

April 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Doroudvash v Zurich Insurance PLC [2025] EWCC 10 HHJ Holmes identified a route whereby the claimant  in a personal injury case could join an additional defendant into an action after the expiry of the initial limitation period.  This construction…

APPELLANT FILED APPEAL WITH TWO MINUTES TO SPARE: HOWEVER IT WAS FILED IMPROPERLY AND THE APPEAL DISMISSED: THE DANGERS OF HYPERLINKS...

APPELLANT FILED APPEAL WITH TWO MINUTES TO SPARE: HOWEVER IT WAS FILED IMPROPERLY AND THE APPEAL DISMISSED: THE DANGERS OF HYPERLINKS…

April 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Dexter Dias in  Kumar v The General Medical Council (Rev1) [2025] EWHC 820 (Admin) contains an important lesson for all litigants. An appellant left filing a notice of appeal until two minutes before the expiry…

£1 MILLION CASE AUTOMATICALLY STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A "ROGUE SOLICITOR" WAS NOT A STRONG ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF REINSTATEMENT

£1 MILLION CASE AUTOMATICALLY STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A “ROGUE SOLICITOR” WAS NOT A STRONG ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF REINSTATEMENT

April 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of HHJ Hassall in  Mr Martyn Ian Haynes v Total Plant Hire Limited is available as a link on an article in the Law Society Gazette, available here.  The case involves a detailed consideration of the Denton criteria. In particular some of the arguments on…

COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL

COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL

April 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Franklin v Your Lawyers Ltd [2025] EWHC 984 (SCCO) Acting Senior Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a defendant solicitor’s argument that it should recover its costs after its former client had issued proceedings seeking the delivery of a statute bill. …

THE DENTON PRINCIPLES AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL (AGAIN): DELAYS REQUIRE AN EXPLANATION - NOT A CHRONOLOGY

THE DENTON PRINCIPLES AND EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO APPEAL (AGAIN): DELAYS REQUIRE AN EXPLANATION – NOT A CHRONOLOGY

April 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Khan & Anor v Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government & Anor [2025] EWHC 969 (Admin) is the second example this week of the court considering the Denton principles when…

"ARGUMENT SHOULD BE LEFT TO THE SKELETON ARGUMENTS":  GUIDANCE ON WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT REPORT

“ARGUMENT SHOULD BE LEFT TO THE SKELETON ARGUMENTS”: GUIDANCE ON WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT REPORT

April 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The Commercial Court report for 2023 – 2024 shows that there have been some changes to the Commercial Court Guide. The  Guide has removed the requirement to obtain permission for a witness statement to exceed 30 pages.  It is hoped…

APPLICATION TO ADDUCE "EXPERT EVIDENCE" FROM THE CLAIMANT'S SON WAS REFUSED: THIS IS NOT AN EXPERT REPORT, IT IS NOT COMPLIANT, NOT IMPARTIAL AND NOT ADMISSIBLE...

APPLICATION TO ADDUCE “EXPERT EVIDENCE” FROM THE CLAIMANT’S SON WAS REFUSED: THIS IS NOT AN EXPERT REPORT, IT IS NOT COMPLIANT, NOT IMPARTIAL AND NOT ADMISSIBLE…

April 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

We are returning to the judgment of Jason Beer KC Rajan Marwaha v Director of Border Revenue & Anor [2025] EWHC 869 (KB) Jason Beer KC and staying with the issue of “expert” evidence. This time looking at the attempt of…

PROVING THINGS 259: WHEN THE COURT REFUSES PERMISSION FOR THE EXPERTS TO GIVE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THESE ARE BASICALLY ISSUES OF FACT

PROVING THINGS 259: WHEN THE COURT REFUSES PERMISSION FOR THE EXPERTS TO GIVE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THESE ARE BASICALLY ISSUES OF FACT

April 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Rajan Marwaha v Director of Border Revenue & Anor [2025] EWHC 869 (KB) Jason Beer KC dismissed the claimant’s application that forensic accountants give evidence at trial.  The experts had basically agreed that there were issues of fact to…

"THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK": COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN

“THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK”: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN

April 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Stephen Herbert Hunt v Oceania Capital Reserves Limited & Ors [2025] EWHC 837 (Ch) Master Brightwell refused the second and third defendants application for relief from sanctions in a case where the costs budget was served late.  However it…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: NO IMPLIED DUTY ON A CLAIMANT TO TAKE STEPS TO ENSURE THAT THE DEFENDANT IS STILL AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: NO IMPLIED DUTY ON A CLAIMANT TO TAKE STEPS TO ENSURE THAT THE DEFENDANT IS STILL AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS

April 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

I am grateful to barrister Anthony Reddiford for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Truman in  Aston -v- Tew & Alwyn Insurance Company Ltd [2025] EWCC 20 , a copy of which is available here. Aston -v-…

DEFENDANT'S POINT ON NON-SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM NOT ACCEPTED: THE CLAIMANT HAD TAKEN ALL REASONABLE STEPS

DEFENDANT’S POINT ON NON-SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM NOT ACCEPTED: THE CLAIMANT HAD TAKEN ALL REASONABLE STEPS

April 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The judgment of Fordham J in  Baz v General Dental Council [2025] EWHC 643 (Admin) contained an interesting issue in relation to service of the claim form.   The defendant conceded that the claim form had been properly placed in the…

COST BITES 224 :  SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: COSTS JUDGE DISMISSES CLAIMANT'S PART 8 ACTION BECAUSE THERE WERE PART 7 PROCEEDINGS PENDING: (DEFENDANT'S COSTS DESCRIBED AS "INCREDIBLE)"

COST BITES 224 : SOLICITORS ACT ASSESSMENT: COSTS JUDGE DISMISSES CLAIMANT’S PART 8 ACTION BECAUSE THERE WERE PART 7 PROCEEDINGS PENDING: (DEFENDANT’S COSTS DESCRIBED AS “INCREDIBLE)”

April 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In Captivatiun Ltd v Orr Litchfield Solicitors Ltd [2025] EWHC 679 (SCCO)  Costs Judge Nagalingam dismissed a client’s application for an assessment of costs under Part 8.  The application was made out of time and there were ongoing Part 7…

APPLICATIONS TO ADJOURN A TRIAL BECAUSE OF ILL HEALTH: APPLICATION REFUSED BECAUSE THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE DID NOT ADDRESS SOME KEY ISSUES

APPLICATIONS TO ADJOURN A TRIAL BECAUSE OF ILL HEALTH: APPLICATION REFUSED BECAUSE THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE DID NOT ADDRESS SOME KEY ISSUES

March 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Nigel Mather & Ors v Lakbir Basran & Ors [2025] EWHC 438 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, refused the defendant’s application for an adjournment of the ongoing trial. The defendant had produced medical evidence…

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW XVI: THE FUTILITY OF TRYING TO READ THE JUDGE’S BODY LANGUAGE

March 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

Many of the posts in this series revisit previous series on the judge’s view. This post looks at the recent case of Russell v Coulter (Rev1) [2025] EWHC 493 (KB). The judge made certain observations when disallowing the evidence of a…

TIME FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: A "SECOND APPEAL": COURT REFUSES TO GRANT EXTENSION

TIME FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: A “SECOND APPEAL”: COURT REFUSES TO GRANT EXTENSION

March 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content

For the second time this week we are looking at issues relating to extension of time and appeals. In Abbotsley Ltd v Pheasantland Ltd [2025] EWHC 654 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith provided a timely reminder that a party who wishes…

NOW HERE'S AN UNUSUAL APPLICATION: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION TO APPROVE A SETTLEMENT REACHED WITH A CLAIMANT - WHO HAD CAPACITY

NOW HERE’S AN UNUSUAL APPLICATION: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION TO APPROVE A SETTLEMENT REACHED WITH A CLAIMANT – WHO HAD CAPACITY

March 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

In David Forsyth v Craig Howson & Anor [2025] EWHC 653 (KB)  HHJ Claire Evans (sitting as Judge of the High Court) refused an unusual application by the defendants.  The claimant had capacity to litigate and yet the defendants sought an order…

CHANGE IN COURT FEES FROM 8th APRIL 2025: LINK TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION

CHANGE IN COURT FEES FROM 8th APRIL 2025: LINK TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION

March 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content

An earlier post set out the changes to court fees that are coming into force on the 8th April 2025.  The Practice Direction that brings those changes into force has now been passed.   THE PRACTICE DIRECTION The Court and…

THE COURT WOULD NOT ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL: FUZZY LINES, COSTS, PREJUDICE AND OTHER FACTORS MEAN ALL ISSUES SHOULD BE HEARD TOGETHER

THE COURT WOULD NOT ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL: FUZZY LINES, COSTS, PREJUDICE AND OTHER FACTORS MEAN ALL ISSUES SHOULD BE HEARD TOGETHER

March 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,

In Tatiana Soroka v Payne Hicks Beach (A Firm) [2025] EWHC 602 (Ch) Master Kaye refused the claimant’s application for a split trial.  The judgment considers in detail the guidance from the authorities and the matters the court should take into account….

"A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY": WHEN DOES TIME FOR APPEALING START TO RUN WHEN A JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT? CLARITY IS ESSENTIAL

“A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY”: WHEN DOES TIME FOR APPEALING START TO RUN WHEN A JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT? CLARITY IS ESSENTIAL

March 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Extensions of time, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Hayden in  F (A Minor) (Permission To Appeal) [2025] EWHC 638 (Fam) highlights a trap for those seeking permission to appeal.  The time for appealing runs from the date that the order was announced and…

COST BITES 223: HOW MUCH DOES AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPLICATION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE COST? £111,616 (APPROXIMATELY): (OH, AND PLUS YOUR OWN COSTS)

COST BITES 223: HOW MUCH DOES AN UNSUCCESSFUL APPLICATION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE COST? £111,616 (APPROXIMATELY): (OH, AND PLUS YOUR OWN COSTS)

March 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

I sometimes have to remind people (and remind myself) that one of the aims of this series is to keep an eye on costs awards that are actually made at hearings at trial.  This provides an insight into what is…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 3: EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS NOT NECESSARY, NOT PROPORTIONATE AND DID NOT REALLY RELATE TO THE PLEADED ISSUES

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 3: EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS NOT NECESSARY, NOT PROPORTIONATE AND DID NOT REALLY RELATE TO THE PLEADED ISSUES

March 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There is a consideration of the principles relating to the use of expert evidence in the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Cohen & Ors v Co-operative Group Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 526 (Ch).  The judge rejected the claimants’…

COURT WAS CORRECT TO REFUSE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHO WAS IN DEFAULT (OH, AND THE PROCEEDINGS HAD NEVER BEEN SERVED PROPERLY ANYWAY...)

COURT WAS CORRECT TO REFUSE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHO WAS IN DEFAULT (OH, AND THE PROCEEDINGS HAD NEVER BEEN SERVED PROPERLY ANYWAY…)

March 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Lumsden v Charles [2025] EWCC 7 HHJ Peter Marquand refused a claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. The claimant had issued Part 8 proceedings but failed to serve the witness evidence and particulars with the proceedings by the rules. …

JUDGE DOES NOT ALLOW A WITNESS TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN A PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: IT CONTAINED "INADMISSIBLE AND IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE" THAT "ATTEMPTS TO USURP MY ROLE IN A CASE"

JUDGE DOES NOT ALLOW A WITNESS TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN A PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: IT CONTAINED “INADMISSIBLE AND IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE” THAT “ATTEMPTS TO USURP MY ROLE IN A CASE”

March 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Witness statements

In Russell v Coulter (Rev1) [2025] EWHC 493 (KB) Mr Justice Saini disallowed the calling of a witness that the claimant planned to call in an action for professional negligence.  The witness statement relied upon contained opinion and inadmissible commentary. …

THIS SKELETON ARGUMENT IS FAR TOO LONG, DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES - AND ISN'T GOING TO BE ADMITTED

THIS SKELETON ARGUMENT IS FAR TOO LONG, DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES – AND ISN’T GOING TO BE ADMITTED

March 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

In  Henderson & Jones Ltd & Ors v Grange Heating Services Ltd & Ors (COSTS) [2024] EWHC 3572 (TCC) Adrian Williamson KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused to admit a “skeleton” argument that was too long and did…

← Previous 1 … 10 11 12 … 47 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

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

Top Posts

  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES

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.