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 31
DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE

DOES A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT HAVE THE BENEFIT OF QOCS? NOT IN THIS COURT: THERE ARE NOW TWO (CONFLICTING) JUDGMENTS ON THIS ISSUE

November 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

I am grateful to Barrister Kevin Latham for sending me details of the decision of HHJ Venn in Waring -v- McDonell [2018] EW Misc B11 (CC). A link to the full decision is also available at the foot of Kevin’s…

101st CPR UPDATE: WELCOME TO THE VIDEO LINK WORLD

101st CPR UPDATE: WELCOME TO THE VIDEO LINK WORLD

November 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Rule Changes, Setting aside judgment

The 101st update to the Civil Procedure Rules apply from 8th and 30th November 2018.  The main development is a procedure whereby applications to set aside default judgment may be heard by video link. SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENTS: HEARD BY…

SIX YEARS ON: YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CASE YOU WANT TO PLEAD: CLAIMANT'S ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO PARTICULARISE CASE

SIX YEARS ON: YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CASE YOU WANT TO PLEAD: CLAIMANT’S ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO PARTICULARISE CASE

November 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

The judgment of HHJ Platts in Wrightson -v- Flor Projects Limited [2018] EWHC 3036 (QB) provides, amongst other things, an important warning on the need to plead and particularise a case properly.  The case shows that when a claimant has…

AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE A WITHOUT NOTICE ORDER IS NOT SUBJECT TO "TIBBLES" CRITERIA: SOMETIMES DENTON DOES NOT APPLY - OR SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED

AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE A WITHOUT NOTICE ORDER IS NOT SUBJECT TO “TIBBLES” CRITERIA: SOMETIMES DENTON DOES NOT APPLY – OR SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED

November 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

There is a short passage in the judgment of Mr Justice Pepperall in Berhad v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2970 (QB) in relation to late service of evidence before an interlocutory hearing. The judge held that the Denton…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5:  IF YOU DON'T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5: IF YOU DON’T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

November 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the High Court decision in Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB). It is one of those cases that illustrate…

TRYING TO APPEAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT IS VERY DIFFICULT - AND THE TCC IS NO DIFFERENT TO OTHER COURTS

TRYING TO APPEAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT IS VERY DIFFICULT – AND THE TCC IS NO DIFFERENT TO OTHER COURTS

October 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Lord Justice Coulson used the judgment in Wheeldon Brothers Waste Ltd v Millennium Insurance Company Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2403 to remind (some) litigators of  some key principles in relation to appeals on findings of fact.   He emphasised that the Technology…

"PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED": ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

“PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED”: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

October 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Kay, R (On the Application Of) v Scan-Thors (UK) Ltd & Anor (Costs) [2018] EWHC 2842 (Admin) the Divisional Court dealt robustly with arguments made by an interested party attempting to resist an order for costs. “Put bluntly, these submissions…

BREXIT AND.... ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES FOR COURT HEARINGS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP

BREXIT AND…. ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES FOR COURT HEARINGS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment in AIG Europe Ltd & Anor, Re [2018] EWHC 2818 (Ch) has already been the subject of some consternation, starting as it does with the words ” This case concerns the reorganisation of a major insurance company to prepare…

NON COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: STRIKING OUT; LATE ATTEMPTS TO COMPLY; LATE "ACCEPTANCE" OF PART 36 OFFERS AND NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

NON COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: STRIKING OUT; LATE ATTEMPTS TO COMPLY; LATE “ACCEPTANCE” OF PART 36 OFFERS AND NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Part 36, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Sanctions, Serving documents, Striking out

In Devoy-Williams -v- High Cartwright & Amin [2018] EWHC 2815 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk upheld a decision that an action was struck out and that relief from sanctions should not be granted. It is a reminder (amongst other things)  of…

TRYING TO SNEAK EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT: PEOPLE MIGHT NOTICE: DEFENDANT'S ATTEMPT TO EXHIBIT EXPERTS STRUCK OUT

TRYING TO SNEAK EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT: PEOPLE MIGHT NOTICE: DEFENDANT’S ATTEMPT TO EXHIBIT EXPERTS STRUCK OUT

October 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There have been numerous cases in which parties have attempted to give expert evidence in witness statements.  Another example can be seen in the decision in New Media Distribution Company Sezc Ltd v Kagalovsky [2018] EWHC 2742 (Ch). An attempt to…

NEW WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED TO CASE MANAGEMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTIONS IS THE ONLY SAFE OPTION

NEW WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED TO CASE MANAGEMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTIONS IS THE ONLY SAFE OPTION

October 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In SJ Moore (Jeweller) Limited -v- Squibb Group Limited [2018] EWHC 2731 (QB) Denton principles were considered and applied when the defendant wanted to adduce new evidence.  What is notable  here is the fact that the defendant had the expert…

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

October 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Adam Heppinstall for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser today in Bates -v- The Post Office [2018] EWHC 2968 (QB). This is a forceful judgment and what the judge had…

A HARSH REMINDER: IF YOU DON'T TURN UP FOR TRIAL THEN THE TEST FOR SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE IS VERY TOUGH: BE PROMPT, BE VERY PROMPT

A HARSH REMINDER: IF YOU DON’T TURN UP FOR TRIAL THEN THE TEST FOR SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE IS VERY TOUGH: BE PROMPT, BE VERY PROMPT

October 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

In Lomax & Ors v Greenslade [2018] EWHC 2623 (Ch)  Mr Justice Henry Carr refused to set aside a judgment obtained after the defendant failed to attend trial. There was a major mistake on the part of the court, however the…

SUCCESSFUL PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS: CLAIMANTS HAD TO GIVE INFORMATION AS TO IMPECUNIOSITY

SUCCESSFUL PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS: CLAIMANTS HAD TO GIVE INFORMATION AS TO IMPECUNIOSITY

October 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content

In EUI Ltd v Charles & Ors [2018] EW Misc B7 (CC) HHJ Robert Harrison made an order that claimants give pre-action disclosure of documents relevant to the issue of impecuniosity.  The practical consequences of this decision could be enormous.  Given…

SOLICITORS AND EXPERT WITNESSES CAN GO TO JAIL: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE VASTLY CHANGED MEDICAL REPORT

SOLICITORS AND EXPERT WITNESSES CAN GO TO JAIL: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE VASTLY CHANGED MEDICAL REPORT

October 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 2581 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham found a solicitor and a doctor in contempt of court.   The solicitor was imprisoned for 12 months, the doctor given a six month sentence,…

WHEN WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL 1: WITNESS EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: A BROKEN FINGER IS NOT A GOOD EXCUSE NOT TO ATTEND COURT

WHEN WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL 1: WITNESS EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: A BROKEN FINGER IS NOT A GOOD EXCUSE NOT TO ATTEND COURT

October 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the first of two posts today in relation to witnesses not attending to be cross-examined.  In EC Medica Group UK Ltd & Ors v Dearnley-Davison & Ors [2018] EWHC 1952 (Ch) Kelyn Bacon QC (sitting as a Deputy High…

WHEN YOU SETTLE THE APPLICATION BUT LEAVE IT TO THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE ISSUE OF COSTS: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH

WHEN YOU SETTLE THE APPLICATION BUT LEAVE IT TO THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE ISSUE OF COSTS: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH

October 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Conversant Wireless Licensing SARL v Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2549 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr had to consider the appropriate order to make when the parties had agreed the terms of an application but could not…

SOLICITORS CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO HAND OVER FILES: HIGH COURT DECISION

SOLICITORS CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO HAND OVER FILES: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Hanley v J C & A Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2592 (QB) Mr Justice Soole decided that the court did not have inherent power to compel solicitors to hand over copies of documents to their former clients. THE CASE Three claimants…

ORDER FOR PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS CAN BE MADE LATE

ORDER FOR PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS CAN BE MADE LATE

October 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content

In Culliford & Anor v Thorpe [2018] EWHC 2532 (Ch) HH Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court judge) held that it was possible for the court to make an order  for an interim payment of costs after the date on…

PROVING THINGS 128: CLAIMANT'S EVIDENCE NOT FULL, CLEAR, FRANK OR UNEQUIVOCAL IN RESPONSE TO APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS

PROVING THINGS 128: CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE NOT FULL, CLEAR, FRANK OR UNEQUIVOCAL IN RESPONSE TO APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS

October 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Security for Costs, Witness statements

In Danilina v Chernukhin & Ors [2018] EWHC 2503 (Comm) Mr Justice Teare was critical of  the quality of the evidence that the respondent adduced in response to an application for security for costs. THE CASE The defendants sought an…

COST LAWYERS - SHOW THEM SOME RESPECT: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

COST LAWYERS – SHOW THEM SOME RESPECT: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

October 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There is a footnote to the judgment of Master Leonard yesterday in Allen v Brethertons LLP [2018] EWHC B15 (Costs) that is worth reading for anyone involved in costs litigation. “Ms Moore, when acting as a Costs Lawyer with a right…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REQUIRED WHEN RESPONDENT'S NOTICE SERVED LATE: DENTON CONSIDERED

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REQUIRED WHEN RESPONDENT’S NOTICE SERVED LATE: DENTON CONSIDERED

October 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Livewest Homes Ltd v Bamber [2018] EWHC 2454 (QB) Mr Justice Dingemans considered the issue of relief from sanctions when a Respondent’s Notice was served late. It is a useful reminder of the importance of serving a respondent’s notice and…

DENTON DECISIONS - AN INVALUABLE RESOURCE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - A THEMATIC GUIDE UPDATED

DENTON DECISIONS – AN INVALUABLE RESOURCE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS – A THEMATIC GUIDE UPDATED

September 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Useful links

I have written before about the invaluable resource provided by The Denton Resource. This has now been updated and is available  following the link here.  Congratulations to barrister Rachel Segal who took on this painstaking task.   The Resource is a…

SECOND ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIM IN DECEIT CAN CONTINUE AFTER CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE FAILED: THE CLAIMANT NEED NOT HAVE GAMBLED ON FRAUD CLAIM FIRST TIME AROUND

SECOND ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIM IN DECEIT CAN CONTINUE AFTER CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE FAILED: THE CLAIMANT NEED NOT HAVE GAMBLED ON FRAUD CLAIM FIRST TIME AROUND

September 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Second set of proceedings

In Playboy Club London Ltd v Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Spa [2018] EWCA Civ 2025 the Court of Appeal overturned a ruling that an action in deceit was an abuse of process. The claimant’s action in negligence failed because there was…

WHY SOLICITORS' ATTENDANCE NOTES CAN BE IMPORTANT: CONSTRUING A CONSENT ORDER: DICTIONARIES AND REASONABLENESS

WHY SOLICITORS’ ATTENDANCE NOTES CAN BE IMPORTANT: CONSTRUING A CONSENT ORDER: DICTIONARIES AND REASONABLENESS

September 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

In Hague v British Telcommunications Plc (Immunotherapy : Reasonableness of Treatment : Private Dictionary Principle) [2018] EWHC 2227 (QB) Master Thornett had to construe the terms of a consent order. It is a case that emphasises the importance of attendance notes. …

BACK TO BASICS 15: CHALLENGING THE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: A PRIMER

BACK TO BASICS 15: CHALLENGING THE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: A PRIMER

September 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

In the 10th post in this series I looked at the importance of serving a notice of non-admittance  of  the authenticity of documents promptly.  Here we look at the basics of the rule. Put bluntly if you do not serve…

DENTON PRINCIPLES MEANS THAT APPEAL BITES THE DUST: CONFUSION AND BEING "LOST IN THE FOREST" ARE NOT GOOD GROUNDS FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

DENTON PRINCIPLES MEANS THAT APPEAL BITES THE DUST: CONFUSION AND BEING “LOST IN THE FOREST” ARE NOT GOOD GROUNDS FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

September 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The Denton principles are considered in detail in the judgment of Edward Murray (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Sabesan v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2018] EWHC 2373 (Admin).   The judgment confirms that the Denton principles are applicable to…

ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: "CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS": CASES AND GUIDANCE

ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE

September 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Useful links

A recent decision by the Bar Standards Board held that a barrister had not acted with reasonable competence when he failed to inform his client  in relation to the risks of bringing a private prosecution. This decision highlights the need…

THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT CANNOT PAY A JUDGMENT DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT

THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT CANNOT PAY A JUDGMENT DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT

September 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Summary judgment

In Caribonum Pension Trustee Ltd & Anor v Pelikan Hardcopy Production AG [2018] EWHC 2321 (Ch) Master Clark rejected an argument that the fact that a defendant was never going to be able to pay a judgment meant that the action…

APPLYING FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING A DEFENCE - AFTER THE DEFENCE IS DUE: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

APPLYING FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR FILING A DEFENCE – AFTER THE DEFENCE IS DUE: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

September 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Default judgment,, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of Deputy Master Pickering in Billington v Davies & Anor [2016] EWHC 1919 (Ch) has only recently appeared on BAILLI. It raises an interesting issue of how the courts should approach the question of a late application to extend…

PROVING THINGS 125: THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING YOUR OWN EXPERT IN THE LOOP: ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF READING AN EXPERT'S NOTES

PROVING THINGS 125: THE IMPORTANCE OF KEEPING YOUR OWN EXPERT IN THE LOOP: ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF READING AN EXPERT’S NOTES

September 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Swift v Carpenter [2018] EWHC 2060 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert gave a lengthy judgment in a high value personal injury case.  One interesting aspect of that case is the problems caused by the defendant’s expert evidence on care.  An additional…

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER ON COURT'S OWN INITIATIVE: A REDETERMINATION OF THE  MATTER AND NOT SUBJECT TO TIBBLES PRINCIPLES

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER ON COURT’S OWN INITIATIVE: A REDETERMINATION OF THE MATTER AND NOT SUBJECT TO TIBBLES PRINCIPLES

August 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a short passage in the judgment today of Master Clark in Massimo Osti SRL v Global Design And Innovation Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2263 (Ch) that provides an important reminder of the relevant principles that apply when a…

PROVING THINGS 124: "PUT BLUNTLY: THAT EVIDENCE IS WHOLLY INADEQUATE": DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE ON AN INJUNCTION APPLICATION

PROVING THINGS 124: “PUT BLUNTLY: THAT EVIDENCE IS WHOLLY INADEQUATE”: DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE ON AN INJUNCTION APPLICATION

August 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Injunctions, Members Content, Witness statements

In Jahangiri v St. George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 2278 (QB)  Mr Justice Nicklin observed that witness evidence put forward by the defendant was far from adequate. “The Court is best assisted when the evidence of someone who…

THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" CONSIDERED: WHEN NON-AUTHORISED PERSONS ATTEMPT TO ELBOW IN ON LITIGATION

THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” CONSIDERED: WHEN NON-AUTHORISED PERSONS ATTEMPT TO ELBOW IN ON LITIGATION

August 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are looking for the third (and final) time at the judgment in  Kassam -v- Gill (13th August 2018, County Court at Birmingham available on Lawtel). The judge considered the meaning of “conduct of litigation” as defined by the Legal Services Act…

SKELETON ARGUMENTS: A ROUND UP: GUIDANCE ON DRAFTING: JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS (& THERE ARE PLENTY): EXAMPLES ONLINE & SANCTIONS FOR LATE SERVICE

SKELETON ARGUMENTS: A ROUND UP: GUIDANCE ON DRAFTING: JUDICIAL COMPLAINTS (& THERE ARE PLENTY): EXAMPLES ONLINE & SANCTIONS FOR LATE SERVICE

August 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

Recent online discussions about skeleton arguments started with a search term that led to this blog “how long should a skeleton argument be?”  This was probably a good time to provide a review highlighting all the posts about skeleton arguments…

DON'T DELAY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: A NAIL IN THE COFFIN FOR CLAIMANTS WHO DECIDE TO WAIT

DON’T DELAY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM JUST BECAUSE YOU DON’T HAVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: A NAIL IN THE COFFIN FOR CLAIMANTS WHO DECIDE TO WAIT

August 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form

There is another aspect of the judgment in Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd v Woodward & Anor [2018] EWHC 2152 (Ch) that needs highlighting. The lesson here is clear:  you cannot delay service of the claim form on the grounds that you…

APPEAL ON FINDING OF FACT ALLOWED: ANOTHER SKIRMISH IN THE CREDIT HIRE WAR

APPEAL ON FINDING OF FACT ALLOWED: ANOTHER SKIRMISH IN THE CREDIT HIRE WAR

August 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Damages, Members Content

I am grateful to Lee Kipling from Winns, solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of HH Judge Gosnell in Morris -v- MCE Insurance Company Ltd.( Morris v MCE Insurance (23.07.18) (Jud) (2)). A case where the judge allowed…

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY TO MONTREAL CONVENTION CLAIMS: DECISION FROM LIVERPOOL

FIXED COSTS DO NOT APPLY TO MONTREAL CONVENTION CLAIMS: DECISION FROM LIVERPOOL

August 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Katie Wheeler from Compass Costs  for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Baldwin (Regional Costs Judge) in McKendry -v- British Airways PLC (hearing 16th May 2018 – judgment received today, available here McKendry)….

CARE EXPERTS, ALLOWED ON APPEAL: NEW EVIDENCE ALSO ALLOWED

CARE EXPERTS, ALLOWED ON APPEAL: NEW EVIDENCE ALSO ALLOWED

August 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Ryan v Resende [2018] EWHC 2145 (QB) Mr Justice Goose allowed the claimant’s appeal and granted permission for it to rely on a care expert.  The judgment shows the importance of having evidence to hand to counter an argument that…

YOU'VE STARTED SO YOU'LL FINISH: MASTER SETS ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE SERVED BY INSURER

YOU’VE STARTED SO YOU’LL FINISH: MASTER SETS ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE SERVED BY INSURER

August 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Insurance, Members Content

In Advantage Insurance Co Ltd v Stoodley & Anor [2018] EWHC 2135 (QB) Master Davison set aside the claimant’s notice of discontinuance made after reading the defendant’s  additional written submissions after a hearing.  The notice of discontinuance was viewed as “tactical….

DEBARRED PARTY CANNOT CROSS-EXAMINE AT TRIAL:  WHAT ROLE CAN A DEBARRED PARTY PLAY AT TRIAL?

DEBARRED PARTY CANNOT CROSS-EXAMINE AT TRIAL: WHAT ROLE CAN A DEBARRED PARTY PLAY AT TRIAL?

August 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Striking out

In Kliers v Schmerler & Anor [2018] EWHC 1350 (Ch) Mr M H Rosen QC (sitting as a  Deputy High Court Judge) refused the defendant’s application that it be allowed to cross-examine the claimant even after it had been debarred from…

THE KIMATHI DECISION 2: TRANSLATORS ON TRIAL: ALSO A LOOK AT THE GUIDANCE ON TRANSLATING WITNESS STATEMENTS

THE KIMATHI DECISION 2: TRANSLATORS ON TRIAL: ALSO A LOOK AT THE GUIDANCE ON TRANSLATING WITNESS STATEMENTS

August 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the second in the series that looks at the decision in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 2066 (QB).  Here we look at issues relating to the translators.  It shows the way in which the…

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 11:  THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE "DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION" PURPOSES AND THE "DATE OF ISSUE" FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 11: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE “DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION” PURPOSES AND THE “DATE OF ISSUE” FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE

August 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

There were a number of search terms which led people to this blog today that related to the date of service and date of issue.  The confusion is, perhaps, easy to understand The relevant date for limitation purposes is the date…

THE KIMATHI DECISION 1: PLEADINGS ARE NOT EVIDENCE

THE KIMATHI DECISION 1: PLEADINGS ARE NOT EVIDENCE

August 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Limitation, Members Content

The judgment in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 2066 (QB)  came after a trial that commenced in May 2016 and lasted until June 2018. It contained a whole range of issues in relation to procedure…

APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM REFUSED: CLAIMANT'S CASE AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT GOES UP IN SMOKE...

APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM REFUSED: CLAIMANT’S CASE AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT GOES UP IN SMOKE…

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Viner -v- Volkswagen Group Limited [2018] EWHC 2006 (QB) Senior Master Fontaine refused the claimants’ application to extend time for service of the claim form. A link to the judgment is available from the Law Society Gazette article on…

CLAIMANT OBTAINS  INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER DEFENDANT'S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER: "BIMBLING" AND OTHER TALES OF MODERN LITIGATION

CLAIMANT OBTAINS INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER DEFENDANT’S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER: “BIMBLING” AND OTHER TALES OF MODERN LITIGATION

July 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

On the Leigh Day website there is a link to a judgment of H.H.J Alan Gore QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in the case of Holmes -v- West London Mental Health NHS Turst (29th June 2018).  The judge…

CIVIL PROCEDURE:BACK TO BASICS 9: THE COURT NOT ENTITLED TO REJECT WRITTEN EVIDENCE UNLESS IT IS "SIMPLY INCREDIBLE"

CIVIL PROCEDURE:BACK TO BASICS 9: THE COURT NOT ENTITLED TO REJECT WRITTEN EVIDENCE UNLESS IT IS “SIMPLY INCREDIBLE”

July 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a short passage in Wards Solicitors v Hendawi [2018] EWHC 1907 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a judge of the High Court), that serves as a reminder of a basic principle in interlocutory proceedings – a court will not…

YOU LOST AT TRIAL - YOU ARE NOT GETTING A SECOND GO: THE JUDGMENT IS HAIR TODAY AND WILL NOT BE GONE TOMORROW...

YOU LOST AT TRIAL – YOU ARE NOT GETTING A SECOND GO: THE JUDGMENT IS HAIR TODAY AND WILL NOT BE GONE TOMORROW…

July 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Liqwd Inc & Anor v L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 1845 (Pat) Mr Justice Birss refused a defendant’s application to “reopen the trial and decide one of the issues afresh” taking into account new evidence. “Many litigants, having…

PLEADING AND ARGUING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THE CLAIMANT KNEW WHAT WAS COMING (ON THIS OCCASION)

PLEADING AND ARGUING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THE CLAIMANT KNEW WHAT WAS COMING (ON THIS OCCASION)

July 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Statements of Case

We have already looked at the factual findings in Pinkus v Direct Line [2018] EWHC 1671. Of equal interest is that part of the judgment where the judge considered the claimant’s argument that the defendant should not be allowed to argue fundamental…

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE: LIMITATION,  SECTION 33 AND DENTON: CARDS ON THE TABLE PLEASE - THIS IS THE CPR

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE: LIMITATION, SECTION 33 AND DENTON: CARDS ON THE TABLE PLEASE – THIS IS THE CPR

July 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Skeleton arguments, Written advocacy

In TPE v Franks [2018] EWHC 1765 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles set aside a default judgment.  The case contains some important observations as to how the courts should consider an application to set aside a default judgment – considering…

← Previous 1 … 30 31 32 … 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

  • 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)
  • 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
  • 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...)
  • 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..."

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.