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 27
THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

October 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Experts, Limitation, Members Content, QOCS, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

  The “Back to Basics” series, as the title suggests, deals with some of the basic elements of civil procedure. It covers everything from applications and bundles to the taking of witness statements.  The titles are often prompted by elements…

REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: "THE SANCTION WAS WHOLLY DISPROPORTIONATE AND IT WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT RELIEF"

REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: “THE SANCTION WAS WHOLLY DISPROPORTIONATE AND IT WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT RELIEF”

October 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Michael v Lillitos [2019] EWHC 2716 (QB) Mrs Justice Steyn overturned a decision refusing relief from sanctions.  The Appellant had made payments by cheque rather than by bank transfer.   It is also an important example of the pitfalls caused…

DENTON APPLIED TO OUT OF TIME APPLICATION IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: THE APPLICANT STAYS IN JAIL

DENTON APPLIED TO OUT OF TIME APPLICATION IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: THE APPLICANT STAYS IN JAIL

October 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Committal proceedings, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Lakatamia v SU [2019] EWCA Civ 1626 the Court of Appeal refused an application for permission to appeal out of time in a case where the applicant had been committed to prison for contempt.   “Hysaj establishes that the…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD...

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD…

October 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One, unusual, aspect of the decision in Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) is that the experts had sought directions from the court. This brings attention to the (apparently) little used provisions of CPR 35.14.  Experts have the…

WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RECORD THEIR MEETING WITH AN EXPERT WITNESS? TWO EXAMPLES WHERE THE COURT'S FOUND THAT AN EXPERT'S STATEMENT OF AN INTERVIEW WAS UNRELIABLE

WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RECORD THEIR MEETING WITH AN EXPERT WITNESS? TWO EXAMPLES WHERE THE COURT’S FOUND THAT AN EXPERT’S STATEMENT OF AN INTERVIEW WAS UNRELIABLE

October 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

An earlier post dealt with the case of Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) and the claimant’s decision to record her appointments with the defendant’s medical experts.  The issue of what, precisely, was said to an expert can…

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT'S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE  OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT’S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

October 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) Master Davison allowed the claimant to produce as evidence the tapes they had recorded of their consultations with the defendant’s medical experts.   This decision raises some interesting issues. (The case…

DISTRICT JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE "PARTIALLY" RECUSED THEMSELVES: THINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A VERY INTERESTING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS...

DISTRICT JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE “PARTIALLY” RECUSED THEMSELVES: THINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A VERY INTERESTING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS…

October 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for providing me a copy of the judgment in Akers -v- Kirlkland [2019] EWHC 2176 (QB) Mr Justice Waksman discussed, in detail, the circumstances in which a judge should recuse themselves and…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 66: THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 66: THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4

October 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

A party seeking to rely on expert evidence requires permission from the court. It is surprising how often the rule requiring the court to be provided with details of the cost of that expert is overlooked. “When parties apply for…

DEFENDANTS - WAKE UP, SERIOUSLY:  A "VERY RELAXED" ATTITUDE TO THE RULES WILL COST YOUR CLIENTS DEAR: APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DEFENCE REFUSED: REFUSAL CONFIRMED ON APPEAL

DEFENDANTS – WAKE UP, SERIOUSLY: A “VERY RELAXED” ATTITUDE TO THE RULES WILL COST YOUR CLIENTS DEAR: APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A DEFENCE REFUSED: REFUSAL CONFIRMED ON APPEAL

October 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Joan Angela Kember v (As Personal Representative of the Estate of Leonard John Kember, Deceased And On Her Own Behalf And On Behalf of His Dependants) [2019] EWHC 2297 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert upheld a refusal to grant a…

SUMMARY ASSESSMENT AND HOURLY RATES: "SOLICITORS PROVIDING SUCH SKILL AND EXPERTISE ARE ENTITLED TO CHARGE THE MARKET HOURLY RATE FOR THEIR AREA OF PRACTICE"

SUMMARY ASSESSMENT AND HOURLY RATES: “SOLICITORS PROVIDING SUCH SKILL AND EXPERTISE ARE ENTITLED TO CHARGE THE MARKET HOURLY RATE FOR THEIR AREA OF PRACTICE”

October 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

In  Ohpen Operations UK Ltd v Invesco Fund Managers Ltd [2019] EWHC 2504 (TCC) Mrs Justice O’Farrell carried out a summary assessment of costs.  She also had something to say in relation to hourly rates.  There is a succinct review…

WHO SACKED WHO? HIGH COURT DECISION AS TO WHETHER THE CLIENT OR THE SOLICITOR ENDED THE RETAINER

WHO SACKED WHO? HIGH COURT DECISION AS TO WHETHER THE CLIENT OR THE SOLICITOR ENDED THE RETAINER

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Walsh v Greystone Financial Services Ltd [2019] EWHC 2573 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee had to decide whether it was the client or the solicitor who ended the retainer. THE CASE At the end of a trial at which the…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: PARTIES WHO ARE JOINED TO A SPECULATIVE ENTERPRISE IN LITIGATION SHOULD EVALUATE THEIR POSITION WITH CARE

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: PARTIES WHO ARE JOINED TO A SPECULATIVE ENTERPRISE IN LITIGATION SHOULD EVALUATE THEIR POSITION WITH CARE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

 In  Ford & Anor v Bennett & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1604 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a trial judge’s decision to award indemnity costs.  The judgment contains a lesson to “additional parties” to litigation. “Parties who…

REALISTIC TIME ESTIMATES: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THIS RIGHT

REALISTIC TIME ESTIMATES: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THIS RIGHT

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

There is a short passage in  Barrowfen Properties Ltd v Hambros Investments Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 2548 (Ch) where Chief Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Briggs makes it clear that an application had been given an inadequate time estimate….

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT'S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT’S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This series looks at the question of when, if ever, it is appropriate for a solicitor to swear an affidavit or make a statement in place of the client? This issue was considered by Stanley Burnton J in Bracken Partners…

LATE SERVICE OF A REPLY: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED - IF IT HAD MATTERED

LATE SERVICE OF A REPLY: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED – IF IT HAD MATTERED

October 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Sports Mantra India Private Ltd & Anor v Force India Formula One Team Ltd [2019] EWHC 2514 (Ch) Deputy High Court Judge Lance Ashworth QC considered the question of whether relief from sanctions should be granted when a Reply…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ISSUES, ANONYMITY, EXPEDITED TRIALS AND ... SPEARMINT RHINO

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ISSUES, ANONYMITY, EXPEDITED TRIALS AND … SPEARMINT RHINO

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

I have been meaning to write more about anonymity and civil litigation, in particular  orders made under CPR 16.  This issue arose today in a surprising context in AAA -v- Rakoff [2019] EWHC 2525 (QB).   The case raises issues in…

COURT OF APPEAL TO CONSIDER IMPACT OF TRANSFERRING CASE FROM LEGAL AID TO CFA:

COURT OF APPEAL TO CONSIDER IMPACT OF TRANSFERRING CASE FROM LEGAL AID TO CFA:

September 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Tom Jenkinson from Bolt Burdon Kemp for letting me know that the Court of Appeal has granted permission to appeal in the case of  XDE v North Middlesex University Hospital Trust [2019] EWHC 1482 (QB) XDE…

CIVIL PROCEDURE, COSTS, EVIDENCE AND - DINOSAURS : A REVIEW OF THE MONTH -  ARTICLES AND POSTS (SEPTEMBER 2019)

CIVIL PROCEDURE, COSTS, EVIDENCE AND – DINOSAURS : A REVIEW OF THE MONTH – ARTICLES AND POSTS (SEPTEMBER 2019)

September 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

Every month I plan to provide links to useful articles and posts on civil procedure.   I am happy for anyone to send me links that are relevant to the topics that this blog covers.  (Links to  posts does not constitute…

STOP ARGUING WITH THE JUDGE AFTER JUDGMENT IS GIVEN: POST-JUDGMENT SUBMISSIONS LEADS TO CASE GOING OFF THE RAILS

STOP ARGUING WITH THE JUDGE AFTER JUDGMENT IS GIVEN: POST-JUDGMENT SUBMISSIONS LEADS TO CASE GOING OFF THE RAILS

September 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

The judgment today in AR & ML [2019] EWFC 56 is of considerable importance to all those who seek to “re-argue” a case after judgment rather than appeal.  Mostyn J attempts to put an end to what he identified as…

POINTS HAVE TO BE PLEADED: APPLICATION TO AMEND AT TRIAL CORRECTLY DISALLOWED: PLEADINGS ARE THERE TO ENSURE THAT THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF EACH PARTY'S CASE ARE KNOWN

POINTS HAVE TO BE PLEADED: APPLICATION TO AMEND AT TRIAL CORRECTLY DISALLOWED: PLEADINGS ARE THERE TO ENSURE THAT THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF EACH PARTY’S CASE ARE KNOWN

September 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  Kensington Mortgage Company Ltd v Mallon & Ors [2019] EWHC 2512 (Ch)  Sir Gerald Barling, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, dismissed an appeal against a judge’s refusal to consider a point that was not pleaded.  The…

SERVE YOUR EVIDENCE IN RESPONSE VERY LATE IN THE DAY - WHAT IS THE COURT GOING TO THINK?

SERVE YOUR EVIDENCE IN RESPONSE VERY LATE IN THE DAY – WHAT IS THE COURT GOING TO THINK?

September 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Gregory & Anor v Moore & Ors [2019] EWHC 2430 (Ch)  Chief Master Marsh commented upon evidence served in response, but very late in the day.   In the absence of an explanation in relation to late service the Master…

AUTOMATICALLY CREATED NAME AT THE FOOT OF AN EMAIL CREATES BINDING CONTRACT TO SELL LAND: "MANY THANKS" FOR THIS

AUTOMATICALLY CREATED NAME AT THE FOOT OF AN EMAIL CREATES BINDING CONTRACT TO SELL LAND: “MANY THANKS” FOR THIS

September 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHJ Pearce in Neocleous & Anor v Rees [2019] EWHC 2462 (Ch) is not about procedure.  However it is a judgment that many litigators must become familiar with. An automatically generated name at the end of an…

SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT TODAY: LINKS TO JUDGMENT AND SUMMARY

SUPREME COURT JUDGMENT TODAY: LINKS TO JUDGMENT AND SUMMARY

September 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

The judgment and summary of the Supreme Court judgment today in Cherry -v- Advocate General for Scotland can be found here.     … Enjoying this post? Become a Civil Litigation Brief member to read full articles and access all premium…

"WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SKELETON ARGUMENT AND A WITNESS STATEMENT?" NOW THERE'S A QUESTION...

“WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SKELETON ARGUMENT AND A WITNESS STATEMENT?” NOW THERE’S A QUESTION…

September 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

That very question “the difference between a skeleton argument and a witness statement” appeared in a search that led someone to this blog today.   It may be worrying that someone has to ask.  The important distinction is often ignored. Day…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: FAILURE TO SERVE ANY DEFENDANTS WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION: THE GOOSE IS NOT PROPERLY COOKED...

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: FAILURE TO SERVE ANY DEFENDANTS WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION: THE GOOSE IS NOT PROPERLY COOKED…

September 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Injunctions, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd v Persons Unknown & Anor [2019] EWHC 2459 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin refused the claimants’ application for an injunction on several grounds. Here we look at the issues relating to service of the claim…

PAYING EXPERT'S FEES: INFORMING AN EXPERT THAT A HEARING IS CANCELLED AND - GETTING STRUCK OFF THE ROLL OF SOLICITORS ...

PAYING EXPERT’S FEES: INFORMING AN EXPERT THAT A HEARING IS CANCELLED AND – GETTING STRUCK OFF THE ROLL OF SOLICITORS …

September 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment in the case of   Clegg v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2019] EWHC 2408. A solicitor was struck off, in circumstances  that could easily have been avoided.   It required the simple step of informing an expert that a trial had…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

September 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post on the judgment in Baynton-Williams v Baynton-Williams [2019] EWHC 2179 (Ch) gives me a chance to return to a hobby horse – the need to give the source of information and belief when signing a witness statement.  Here…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DANGERS OF INADVERTENTLY MISLEADING THE COURT: CHECK BEFORE YOU ASSERT (ALSO A MESSAGE HERE FOR EXPERTS)

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DANGERS OF INADVERTENTLY MISLEADING THE COURT: CHECK BEFORE YOU ASSERT (ALSO A MESSAGE HERE FOR EXPERTS)

September 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The judgment of Master Clark in Baynton-Williams v Baynton-Williams [2019] EWHC 2179 (Ch) contains a number of important lessons : (i) for anyone preparing a witness statement to be careful not to inadvertently mislead the court; (ii) for experts – on…

WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM

WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM

September 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content

The decision in Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1504 related to a case where a decision was made when the judge was not given relevant papers that had arrived at court. “In…

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL:  KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE - A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL: KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE – A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

September 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

Appeals are always difficult.  The appellate court has to be persuaded that the first-instance judge was “wrong”, and this is a fairly rigorous test.  It is made far more difficult if the appellate court is given the wrong documents. Particularly…

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: DEFENDANT'S SOLICITOR FAILED TO NOTICE THAT PARTICULARS OF CLAIM HAD BEEN SERVED WITH THE CLAIM FORM

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: DEFENDANT’S SOLICITOR FAILED TO NOTICE THAT PARTICULARS OF CLAIM HAD BEEN SERVED WITH THE CLAIM FORM

September 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

The judgment of HH Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a HIgh Court Judge)  in Praetura Asset Finance Ltd v Hood [2019] EWHC 2231 (Comm) shows how important it is to check what has been served.  The one, overwhelming, lesson for…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 60: INTERIM ORDERS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: "CASH FLOW IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF BUSINESS"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 60: INTERIM ORDERS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: “CASH FLOW IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF BUSINESS”

September 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Here we look at the rules relating to interim orders on account of costs, a subject of considerable importance in relation to practitioner’s cash flow and client’s pockets.  CPR 44.2(8) “(8) Where the court orders a party to pay costs…

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR PARTIES TO ARRIVE AT COURT: APPEAL AGAINST ORDER UNDER CPR 39.3 ALLOWED

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR PARTIES TO ARRIVE AT COURT: APPEAL AGAINST ORDER UNDER CPR 39.3 ALLOWED

September 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Akita & Anor v Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland [2019] EWHC 1712 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer held that a trial judge, knowing that parties were on the way to court, should have waited longer before…

WEBINARS: (1) LOSS OF EARNINGS (2) COURT FEES - AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: TWO PLUGS

WEBINARS: (1) LOSS OF EARNINGS (2) COURT FEES – AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: TWO PLUGS

September 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Courses, Court fees, Damages, Members Content, Striking out

Just a brief reminder of two webinars this month: one on loss of earnings, the other on court fees and associated issues. CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS This webinar “Claims for loss of earnings: law, procedure and evidence, prove it…

DE MINIMIS BREACH OF RULES DID NOT LEAD TO PART 36 OFFER BEING INVALID

DE MINIMIS BREACH OF RULES DID NOT LEAD TO PART 36 OFFER BEING INVALID

August 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Momonakaya v the Ministry of Defence [2019] EWHC 480 (QB) HHJ Blair QC considered whether a claimant had properly accepted a Part 36 offer.  It was held that an offer that breached the rules in a de minimis way was…

WHEN THE COURT LOSES IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS IN THE COURTS: "CIVIL JUSTICE: 2019 STYLE"

WHEN THE COURT LOSES IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS IN THE COURTS: “CIVIL JUSTICE: 2019 STYLE”

August 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am grateful to solicitor Aaron Pearson for giving me permission to post some comments he put on LinkedIn earlier today. It is  small issue, but is an example of the administrative errors that occur daily within the court system,…

BOTH SIDES LATE WITH WITNESS EVIDENCE: BOTH SIDES REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: DEUCE IN A JUICE CASE

BOTH SIDES LATE WITH WITNESS EVIDENCE: BOTH SIDES REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: DEUCE IN A JUICE CASE

August 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

There are many interesting aspects of the judgment in  Goknur Gida Maddeleri Enerji Imalat Ithalat Ihracat Ticaret VE Sanati A.S (Goknur) v Organic Village Ltd [2019] EWHC 2201 (QB), not least that both sides were in default in relation to…

WHY IT IS IMPORTANT LITIGATORS KNOW HOW TO COMPUTE TIME PROPERLY:  7 DAYS MEANS 7 DAYS: APPLICATION TWO DAYS LATE: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

WHY IT IS IMPORTANT LITIGATORS KNOW HOW TO COMPUTE TIME PROPERLY: 7 DAYS MEANS 7 DAYS: APPLICATION TWO DAYS LATE: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

August 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content

In Evans v Pinsent Masons LLP [2019] EWHC 2150 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer overturned a decision granting relief from sanctions. A major issue arose out of confusion by the claimant’s solicitors over the calculation of the time period. This…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 9: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM (3): SERVICE AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 9: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM (3): SERVICE AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS

August 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Staying with  issues relating to service of the claim form we are looking at another common source of error –  service at the “last known address”.   The key point here is that a claimant cannot simply serve at the “last…

PART 8 PROCEDURE USED FOR CLAIM FOR £2.6 MILLION: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF - IS ANYONE SURPRISED?

PART 8 PROCEDURE USED FOR CLAIM FOR £2.6 MILLION: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF – IS ANYONE SURPRISED?

August 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

A common practice has occurred of issuing Part 8 proceedings under the MOJ Protocol and “parking” cases there for an extended period.  This is an extremely dangerous practice.  It is even more dangerous if the case that has been parked…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN WITNESS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE SERVED LATE : EXPLAIN DELAY EVEN IF THERE IS NO GOOD REASON FOR IT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN WITNESS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE SERVED LATE : EXPLAIN DELAY EVEN IF THERE IS NO GOOD REASON FOR IT

August 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Castle Trustees Ltd -v-Bombay Palace Restaurant Ltd [2017] EWHC 3893 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford allowed the defendant’s application for relief from sanctions when the defendant served witness and expert evidence late. This case is interesting for a number of…

NO COSTS ORDER AGAINST SOLICITORS OR COUNSEL WHO WERE ACTING ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS

NO COSTS ORDER AGAINST SOLICITORS OR COUNSEL WHO WERE ACTING ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS

August 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

In  Willers v Joyce & Ors [2019] EWHC 2183 (Ch) Lady Justice Rose dismissed an application for costs against solicitors and counsel who had represented an unsuccessful party on a conditional fee basis. “… there is a strong public interest…

WHEN A SOLICITOR MAKES A WITNESS STATEMENT: STATE THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND DON'T GIVE "OPINION" EVIDENCE (IT REALLY DOESN'T GO DOWN WELL)

WHEN A SOLICITOR MAKES A WITNESS STATEMENT: STATE THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND DON’T GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE (IT REALLY DOESN’T GO DOWN WELL)

August 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are numerous examples on this blog of the difficulties that can occur when a solicitor makes a witness statement on behalf of their clients. The dangers are exemplified in the judgment of Master Marsh in Folgender Holdings Ltd &…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 57: YOU CAN'T SUBMIT THAT A WITNESS IS LYING UNLESS YOU HAVE PUT THAT CASE TO THEM

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 57: YOU CAN’T SUBMIT THAT A WITNESS IS LYING UNLESS YOU HAVE PUT THAT CASE TO THEM

August 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

A short, but fundamental, point about making submissions at the close of a case.  You cannot  generally make submissions that a witness  is lying unless that case has been put directly to that witness in cross-examination. “It is a fundamental…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 5: BE WARY OF EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS ON WATER: BOATS AND SHIPS (& GANGWAYS)

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 5: BE WARY OF EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS ON WATER: BOATS AND SHIPS (& GANGWAYS)

August 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

  In the fifth in this updated series we are looking at the different time periods that apply when an accident occurs on, or even near, water. The aim, as ever, is to flag these issues up so that (as…

A SOLICITOR WHO FILES AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE STAYS ON THE RECORD UNTIL  A NOTICE OF CHANGE OR THEY MAKE AN APPLICATION TO BE REMOVED

A SOLICITOR WHO FILES AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE STAYS ON THE RECORD UNTIL A NOTICE OF CHANGE OR THEY MAKE AN APPLICATION TO BE REMOVED

August 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Serving documents, Uncategorized

In Ashley & Anor v Jimenez [2019] EWHC 1806 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh rejected an argument that service on a solicitor who given their address for service in the acknowledgement of service was not good service of an application. For…

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS REFUSED:

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DETAILED ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS REFUSED:

August 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There are many lessons that litigation lawyers can learn from the judgment of Master Leonard in  Rattan v Carter-Ruck Solicitors [2019] EWHC B9 (Costs).  It is a case where a client agreed to a settlement and then, essentially, sought to…

COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT OF DEFENCE - SIDESTEPPING THE LATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE ARGUMENT: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIES

COURT ENTERS JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT OF DEFENCE – SIDESTEPPING THE LATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE ARGUMENT: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIES

July 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

 In Hanson & Ors v Carlino & Anor [2019] EWHC 1940 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk neatly sidestepped the vexed question of when a claimant can enter judgment in default of acknowledgement of service by entering judgment in default of defence. …

WHEN YOU ARE CHALLENGING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT "BE PREPARED": MASTER FINDS THAT COURT COSTS OFFICERS DO HAVE JURISDICTION TO CONDUCT PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENTS: THE LIMITED SCOPE OF AN APPEAL FROM A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT

WHEN YOU ARE CHALLENGING A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT “BE PREPARED”: MASTER FINDS THAT COURT COSTS OFFICERS DO HAVE JURISDICTION TO CONDUCT PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENTS: THE LIMITED SCOPE OF AN APPEAL FROM A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT

July 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Robin Dunne for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Leonard in PME -v- The Scout Association (30/07/2019).    1. JUDGMENT PME (003).  This deals with two issues (i) the jurisdiction of…

AGREEMENTS TO EXTEND TIME : THEY CAN BE A GOOD THING - BUT MUST BE DONE PROPERLY

AGREEMENTS TO EXTEND TIME : THEY CAN BE A GOOD THING – BUT MUST BE DONE PROPERLY

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content

In Cowan v Foreman & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1336 the Court of Appeal were far more supportive of the idea that parties in Inheritance Act claims could agree a “limitation amnesty”.  However an agreement has to be drafted with…

← Previous 1 … 26 27 28 … 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.