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 26
REDACTING DOCUMENTS: MAY CAUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE MADE AND EXPLANATIONS MAY NEED TO BE GIVEN

REDACTING DOCUMENTS: MAY CAUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE MADE AND EXPLANATIONS MAY NEED TO BE GIVEN

January 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

One other aspect of the judgment of HHJ Lethem in Ivanoy -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020) is in the orders made after the judgment. It concerns the redaction of documents.   THE CASE The primary issue in the…

FAILING TO TURN UP TO A TRIAL: DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION REFUSED:  CPR 39.3(3) CONSIDERED

FAILING TO TURN UP TO A TRIAL: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION REFUSED: CPR 39.3(3) CONSIDERED

January 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

This blog has looked several times at the issues relating to CPR 39.3(3), the rule that governs an application when a party fails to attend a trial or hearing.   The rule was considered by Mrs Justice Lambert in  KD v…

ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES: WAS THIRTY MINUTES LONG ENOUGH?

ADEQUATE TIME ESTIMATES: WAS THIRTY MINUTES LONG ENOUGH?

January 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content

One other aspect of the judgment HHJ Lethem in Ivanoy -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020) relates to time estimates. It highlights the importance of giving appropriate time estimates, reviewing the estimate if the matter becomes complex and the…

APPLYING FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A "CUT OUT AND KEEP" GUIDE TO THE AUTHORITIES

APPLYING FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE TO THE AUTHORITIES

January 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is surprising how often searches that lead to this blog are questions about seeking adjournments on the grounds of ill health.  This appears to be common issue.  A useful “cut out and keep” summary of the relevant authorities can…

LIMITATION:  THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD AND THE USE OF SECTION 33 IN AN EXTREMELY SENSITIVE CASE

LIMITATION: THE EXPIRY OF THE LIMITATION PERIOD AND THE USE OF SECTION 33 IN AN EXTREMELY SENSITIVE CASE

January 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Limitation, Members Content

I have to admit I have hesitated before writing about the judgment of Mrs Justice Yip in Young v Downey [2019] EWHC 3508 (QB), it is an extremely sensitive case that has already been widely reported. However that part of…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 77: THE COURT MUST KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4(2)

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 77: THE COURT MUST KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4(2)

January 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

CPR 35.4(2) is often overlooked. This rule imposes a duty on a party applying for permission to rely on expert evidence to inform the court how much the expert is likely to cost.  This is often clear at the costs…

APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 KEY POINTS

APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 KEY POINTS

January 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

We are now nearly six years on from the Denton decision and the principles are familiar to most litigators.  However applications for relief from sanctions are still a regular occurrence.  Success is never guaranteed. Here I want to look again at…

PERSONAL INJURY CASES WHERE THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND HAS NO ASSETS: LOOK TO THE CLAIMANT'S OWN INSURANCE POLICY

PERSONAL INJURY CASES WHERE THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND HAS NO ASSETS: LOOK TO THE CLAIMANT’S OWN INSURANCE POLICY

January 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

Periodically I repeat the second ever post on this blog.  This related to the (surprising to many) fact that it may be possible for a claimant with an unsatisfied judgment to recover damages from their own domestic insurance policy.  …

11th HOUR APPLICATION TO INTRODUCE NEW WITNESS EVIDENCE (AND A NEW CASE) REFUSED

11th HOUR APPLICATION TO INTRODUCE NEW WITNESS EVIDENCE (AND A NEW CASE) REFUSED

January 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Crumpler & Anor (Liquidators Of Peak Hotels And Resorts Ltd v Candey Limited [2019] EWHC 3558 (Ch) HHJ Davis-White QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a party relief from sanctions where witness statements were served late.  The…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: "THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM"

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: “THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM”

December 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Committal proceedings, Costs, Members Content

In January I wrote “I am starting to lose count of the number of times the Court of Appeal has overturned decisions committing people to prison because of very basic and fundamental failures of procedure.  It is as though all…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 76: APPEALS - ASKING THE JUDGE FOR REASONS: "EMBARRASSMENT" IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 76: APPEALS – ASKING THE JUDGE FOR REASONS: “EMBARRASSMENT” IS NO EXCUSE NOT TO

December 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment in Fattahi v Charles Grosvenor Ltd [2019] EWHC 3497 (QB) also highlights the advisability of an appellant, arguing that a decision was not properly reasoned, to ask the original judge for further reasons. “I have been unable to…

"THEY LOST": THE DANGERS OF OVERCONFIDENCE IN CORRESPONDENCE

“THEY LOST”: THE DANGERS OF OVERCONFIDENCE IN CORRESPONDENCE

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content

“Never write anything you will be embarrassed by the court reading” is an essential piece of advice for all lawyers (and one I suspect we have all, occasionally, breached). An example can be seen in the opening lines of the…

PART 36, FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS AND PRE-ACTION SETTLEMENT: A POINT FOR BOTH CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS TO WATCH

PART 36, FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS AND PRE-ACTION SETTLEMENT: A POINT FOR BOTH CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS TO WATCH

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Kore v Brocklebank [2019] EWHC 3491 (QB) raises some interesting issues in relation to Part 36 and fatal accident claims.  It means that both claimants and defendants will have to take considerable care…

THE COURT WILL NOT READILY IMPLY SANCTIONS INTO ORDERS THAT DO NOT EXPRESSLY CONTAIN SANCTIONS: AN EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT FOR LITIGATORS

THE COURT WILL NOT READILY IMPLY SANCTIONS INTO ORDERS THAT DO NOT EXPRESSLY CONTAIN SANCTIONS: AN EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT FOR LITIGATORS

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  Djurberg v London Borough of Richmond & Ors [2019] EWHC 3342 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh held that a party did not require relief from sanctions when it failed to comply with a court order that did not impose a…

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: TO WHAT EXTENT IS "HYPOTHETICAL" EVIDENCE FROM DOCTORS ADMISSIBLE?

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: TO WHAT EXTENT IS “HYPOTHETICAL” EVIDENCE FROM DOCTORS ADMISSIBLE?

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert in AB v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 3542 (QB), provides an important lessons for those who draft witness statements, particularly on behalf of defendants in clinical negligence cases.   The question is…

COSTS AGAINST A NON-PARTY: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

COSTS AGAINST A NON-PARTY: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

December 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Colm Nugent for sending me a copy of the decision of Veronique Buehrlen Q.C in Rubiera -v- Building & Handyman Group Ltd (13th December 2019). It relates to a non-part costs order being made against a…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (7): WITHDRAWING FROM ADMISSIONS (AND ANOTHER CHANCE TO PAY HOMAGE TO GUIDE DOG RALPH)

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (7): WITHDRAWING FROM ADMISSIONS (AND ANOTHER CHANCE TO PAY HOMAGE TO GUIDE DOG RALPH)

December 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There have been relatively few cases about applications to withdraw from admissions this year. Interestingly most of them have been refusing applications to withdraw.  However the main point of this post is to pay homage to Guide Dog Ralph, who…

CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES - BUT NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES – BUT NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

December 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Sheinberg v Abdon & Ors [2019] EWHC 3220 (Ch) Master Clark decided that there should be no order for costs after a claimant discontinued his case. The conduct of the defendants was a highly relevant factor. “The amount involved…

HIGH COURT ALLOWS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL FAILING A FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE ON TIME

HIGH COURT ALLOWS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL FAILING A FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE ON TIME

December 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Badejo v Cranston [2019] EWHC 3343 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt overturned the decision of a Circuit Judge and granted relief from sanctions to a claimant who had failed to pay the trial fee in time.   One issue related to…

"PLEADINGS ARE NOT A GAME OF LUDO": TESCO REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION

“PLEADINGS ARE NOT A GAME OF LUDO”: TESCO REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION

December 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In SL Claimants v Tesco Plc [2019] EWHC 3312 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard refused an application by Tesco PLC to withdraw an admission.   There is a detailed consideration of the factors to be considered when a party seeks permission to…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE - THE YEAR IN REVIEW (3): SANCTIONS AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT...)

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (3): SANCTIONS AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT…)

December 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Another certainty about writing about civil procedure is that every year will bring a batch of applications relating to sanctions and relief from sanctions.  This year has been no different.  We start off (from the end of last year) with…

WHY FAILING IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION CAN BE EXPENSIVE: (£1,015,722 - EXPENSIVE)

WHY FAILING IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION CAN BE EXPENSIVE: (£1,015,722 – EXPENSIVE)

November 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In BTI 2014 LLC v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Anor [2019] EWHC 3219 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt considered the appropriate order for costs when a defendant failed in an application for summary judgment.  The defendants were ordered to pay the costs…

IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT? WELL, IT DEPENDS... (& IT HAS CONSEQUENCES)

IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT? WELL, IT DEPENDS… (& IT HAS CONSEQUENCES)

November 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Healys LLP v Partridge & Anor [2019] EWHC 2471 (Ch) Kelyn Bacon QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the issue of whether a conditional fee agreement was a contentious business agreement.  This has practical consequences in…

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE'S DECISION

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE’S DECISION

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

In  L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor v Liqwd Inc & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1943  the Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s decision not to admit new evidence that a defendant attempted to introduce after judgment was handed down….

THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A "TRUSTED BRAND"/"CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER": THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH

THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A “TRUSTED BRAND”/”CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER”: THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH

November 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Lord Justice Coulson rejecting the Post Office’s application for permission to appeal is available on “Post Office Trial”, a case that has already been looked at several times on this blog.   Here we have a critical appraisal…

DRAFTING SKELETON ARGUMENTS: ROUNDING UP THE POSTS

DRAFTING SKELETON ARGUMENTS: ROUNDING UP THE POSTS

November 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Written advocacy

  Here we look at some guidance, and some previous posts on this blog, about drafting skeleton arguments. “Sir James Hunt has told us of the (unattributed) judicial reaction on receiving a 35 page document which was to the effect…

UNWARRANTED FRAUD ALLEGATION LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED

UNWARRANTED FRAUD ALLEGATION LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED

November 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Natixis SA v Marex Financial & Ors [2019] EWHC 2549 (Comm) an award of indemnity costs was made against a party who had alleged fraud all the way up to closing submissions.   It highlights the dangers of pleading fraud…

DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL REFUSED: A PROBLEM OF THEIR OWN MAKING: THE TRIAL WILL GO AHEAD

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL REFUSED: A PROBLEM OF THEIR OWN MAKING: THE TRIAL WILL GO AHEAD

November 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Useful links

There is an interesting summary of   the decision in Mitchell -v- Precis 545 Ltd (15/11/2019)  on Kings Chambers website. A report by my colleague Jeremy Roussak of a case where he represented the claimant and where HHJ Freedman refused a…

LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL...): MASTER'S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING

LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL…): MASTER’S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING

November 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There are some observations in the judgment of Master Thornett in Palizban v Protech (UK) Ltd [2019] EWHC 3090 (QB) that every litigator should read.  It relates to the manner in which solicitors present witness statements, and documents, in interlocutory…

SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND THE "TRAP FOR THE UNWARY CLAIMANT": THE TRAP OPERATED AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED

SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND THE “TRAP FOR THE UNWARY CLAIMANT”: THE TRAP OPERATED AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED

November 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

The judgment of Chief Master Marsh today in Maggistro-Contenta & Anor v O’Shea & Anor [2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch) is a prime example of difficulties being caused because of a mistake in relation to the rules relating to service.   It…

ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF"

ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF”

November 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Parties to actions, Relief from sanctions

In ABC v Google LLC [2019] EWHC 3020 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini refused an (anonymous) claimants application for relief from sanctions.  The case has some unusual features, however it does highlight the point that a relief from sanctions application…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 70: OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS

November 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There have been several recent cases in which the courts have emphasised the difference between knowledge and “opinion” in witness evidence. In Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 the Court of Appeal dismissed an argument that the defendant was…

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE BROUGHT IN RELATION TO PRE-ACTION WITNESS STATEMENTS:  COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE AMENDED TO ALLEGE FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE IN THE COURSE OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE BROUGHT IN RELATION TO PRE-ACTION WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE AMENDED TO ALLEGE FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE IN THE COURSE OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS

November 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 the Court of Appeal held that committal proceedings can be brought in relation to allegedly false witness statements made and disclosed under the pre-action protocols.  It is…

WHEN "ROBUST" CASE MANAGEMENT TURNS INTO APPARENT BIAS: HIGH COURT OVERTURNS DIRECTIONS: THE TALE OF THE ORGAN GRINDER

WHEN “ROBUST” CASE MANAGEMENT TURNS INTO APPARENT BIAS: HIGH COURT OVERTURNS DIRECTIONS: THE TALE OF THE ORGAN GRINDER

November 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In Dorman & Ors v Clinton Devon Farms Partnership [2019] EWHC 2988 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini allowed an appeal against directions made by a Circuit Judge. He also upheld an appeal against that judges refusal to recuse himself on…

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN'T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN’T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

November 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The danger of witness statements from solicitors purporting to give evidence as to fact has been emphasised many times in the cases reported on the blog.   The danger can be seen again in the judgment of Ms Pat Treacy (sitting…

APPLYING FOR DISPENSATION FROM COURT FEES: TWO DIFFERENT CASES

APPLYING FOR DISPENSATION FROM COURT FEES: TWO DIFFERENT CASES

November 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Paul Hughes for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Jenkinson in the case of Stone -v- Allianz Insurance PLC where Paul acted for the defendant.  This, and the case of…

COURT IN THE MIDDLE? CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AND LEGAL AID: JUDGE EMPHASISES THE COMPLEX MESS ABOUT FUNDING

COURT IN THE MIDDLE? CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AND LEGAL AID: JUDGE EMPHASISES THE COMPLEX MESS ABOUT FUNDING

November 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

There have been concerns in the past about the way in which civil committal proceedings are carried out.  A guide to the careful approach needed is shown in the judgment of Chamberlain J in  The All England Lawn Tennis Club…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CANDOUR FROM THE APPLICANT AND NO EVIDENCE FROM THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE PREJUDICE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CANDOUR FROM THE APPLICANT AND NO EVIDENCE FROM THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE PREJUDICE

November 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a report of a case where relief from sanctions was granted in Anglia Autoflow North America LLC and Another v Anglia Autoflow Ltd [2019] Costs LR 155. One thing that marks this case is the total candour from the…

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 6: WORKLOAD: THE IDEAL CASELOAD OR "BURY EVERYBODY" - WHICH IS MORE PROFITABLE?

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 6: WORKLOAD: THE IDEAL CASELOAD OR “BURY EVERYBODY” – WHICH IS MORE PROFITABLE?

November 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Useful links, Well being

This is unlikely to be the last post on this topic.  Workload is likely to be the main source of stress for most litigators. The very basic issue of what is an appropriate caseload for litigators is often complained about…

THE RIDICULOUS RULES ABOUT PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: DOES THE RULES COMMITTEE JUST NOT LISTEN (OR JUST NOT CARE)?

THE RIDICULOUS RULES ABOUT PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: DOES THE RULES COMMITTEE JUST NOT LISTEN (OR JUST NOT CARE)?

November 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

The previous post in this case on the judgment in Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) highlights the problems posed by one of the most ridiculous rules…

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROMPT APPLICATIONS

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROMPT APPLICATIONS

November 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) Matthew Gullick (sitting as a High Court judge) granted the claimants relief from sanctions in relation to late service…

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 5: THINGS WILL GO WRONG: "YOU GOTTA HAVE A PLAN": DON'T CRASH...

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 5: THINGS WILL GO WRONG: “YOU GOTTA HAVE A PLAN”: DON’T CRASH…

October 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

No matter how hard you try, on occasions, things will go wrong in litigation.  Do you have a plan?  Here we examine the need to have a plan to cover default and other issues in litigation. We then look in…

THE COURT WOULD NOT EXTEND THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT TO ALLOW CLAIMANT TO SEEK TO RECOVER SUMS FROM A THIRD PARTY

THE COURT WOULD NOT EXTEND THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT TO ALLOW CLAIMANT TO SEEK TO RECOVER SUMS FROM A THIRD PARTY

October 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The interesting thing about writing a blog on civil procedure is that – despite the apparent narrowness of the subject –  new issues come up all the time.  You can never say you have “seen it all”.  I was reading…

PARTIES SHOULD OBTAIN PERMISSION OF THE COURT, AND DIRECTIONS, BEFORE INSTRUCTING EXPERTS

PARTIES SHOULD OBTAIN PERMISSION OF THE COURT, AND DIRECTIONS, BEFORE INSTRUCTING EXPERTS

October 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Gulf International Bank BSC v Aldwood [2019] EWHC 1666 (QB) John Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) made some observations about using expert evidence on foreign law without the court’s permission.   THE CASE The judge was…

"IF COURT PROCEEDINGS ARE SERVED ON A SOLICITOR WITHOUT AUTHORITY - IS THAT GOOD SERVICE?": A QUESTION WITH AN EASY ANSWER

“IF COURT PROCEEDINGS ARE SERVED ON A SOLICITOR WITHOUT AUTHORITY – IS THAT GOOD SERVICE?”: A QUESTION WITH AN EASY ANSWER

October 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

“If court proceedings are served on a solicitor without authority is that good service” was a search that led to this blog yesterday.  This is a question with a very easy answer.  This blog has looked at this issue several…

WITNESS SUMMARIES,  WITNESS SUMMONSES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL IN ONE CASE...

WITNESS SUMMARIES, WITNESS SUMMONSES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL IN ONE CASE…

October 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Morley (t/a Morley Estates) v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc [2019] EWHC 2865 (Ch) Mr Justice Kerr granted the claimant’s application to rely on witness summaries and refused the defendant’s application to set aside witness summonses.  The judge…

PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)

PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)

October 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Today seems a good day to consider prospective applications for extensions of time. These are going to figure in every litigators career at some point.  A knowledge of the relevant law is essential. A prospective application of time is dealt…

DEFECTIVE PART 36 OFFER MEANT CLAIMANT DID NOT OBTAIN PART 36 BENEFITS: WHY CLAIMANTS SHOULD DRAFT THEIR PART 36 OFFERS CAREFULLY

DEFECTIVE PART 36 OFFER MEANT CLAIMANT DID NOT OBTAIN PART 36 BENEFITS: WHY CLAIMANTS SHOULD DRAFT THEIR PART 36 OFFERS CAREFULLY

October 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF costs for sending me a copy of the decision of District Judge Osborne in Flanagan -v- Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance PLC (16th May 2019). A copy of that case is available…

A CRI DE COEUR FOR MORE MONEY WON'T GET YOU AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: MASTER EMPHASISES THE NEED FOR HARD EVIDENCE

A CRI DE COEUR FOR MORE MONEY WON’T GET YOU AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: MASTER EMPHASISES THE NEED FOR HARD EVIDENCE

October 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

In RXK v Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2751 (QB) Master Cook made some important observations about the quality of evidence needed to obtain an interim order for costs in an ongoing case. (The judgment in X -v-…

WHY PROCEDURAL RULES ARE IMPORTANT (AND LEAD TO SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE): "JUDGES ARE NOT SUPERHUMAN, AND DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS"

WHY PROCEDURAL RULES ARE IMPORTANT (AND LEAD TO SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE): “JUDGES ARE NOT SUPERHUMAN, AND DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS”

October 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

In  Paralel Routs Ltd v Fedotov [2019] EWHC 2656 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a judge of the High Court) emphasised the importance of procedural rules.   There are quite a few interesting observations in relation to disclosure, redaction, civil…

← Previous 1 … 25 26 27 … 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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

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

Top Posts

  • COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF "COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS": THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 2: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PD57AC: "HE KNOWS NOT OF WHAT HE SPEAKS"

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.