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 6
SERVICE POINTS 21: VERY STRICT REQUIREMENTS APPLY IF YOU WANT TO AGREE AN EXTENSION OF TIME: THEY HAVE TO BE IN WRITING AND THEY HAVE TO BE TOTALLY CLEAR AS TO DATES...

SERVICE POINTS 21: VERY STRICT REQUIREMENTS APPLY IF YOU WANT TO AGREE AN EXTENSION OF TIME: THEY HAVE TO BE IN WRITING AND THEY HAVE TO BE TOTALLY CLEAR AS TO DATES…

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content

We are looking at the same case again here, but from a slightly different angle. This relates to written agreements to vary court orders.  Firstly the agreements have to be in writing; secondly they have to be totally clear as…

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (3): THE AGENCY THAT CARRIED OUT A STING OPERATION ON A (RETIRED) JUDGE, AMONG OTHERS...

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (3): THE AGENCY THAT CARRIED OUT A STING OPERATION ON A (RETIRED) JUDGE, AMONG OTHERS…

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct

If you think that the account of enquiry agents carrying out a sting operation on the other side’s solicitor is remarkable then sit down for a while. That judgment also reveals that (in wholly unrelated proceedings) the agency in question…

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are returning again to the case where the claimants arranged the taping of meetings with the defendants’ solicitors.  The judge was sceptical of the claimants’ assertions that they were not fully aware of the methods being used. (This case…

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE LAW, PRACTICE AND SPECIAL CASES: WEBINAR 17th NOVEMBER 2025

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE LAW, PRACTICE AND SPECIAL CASES: WEBINAR 17th NOVEMBER 2025

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Personal Injury

You may be reading this for the second time – but it may be partly your own fault.…  This webinar looks at the law relating to contributory negligence, the legislation and the key cases.  Booking details are available here.  …

SERVICE POINTS 20: ANOTHER ACTION FAILS BECAUSE OF NON-SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A REMINDER THAT CPR 7(6) IS VERY STRICT: THE COURT WOULD NOT IMPLY AN AGREEMENT FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE TIME FOR SERVICE

SERVICE POINTS 20: ANOTHER ACTION FAILS BECAUSE OF NON-SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A REMINDER THAT CPR 7(6) IS VERY STRICT: THE COURT WOULD NOT IMPLY AN AGREEMENT FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE TIME FOR SERVICE

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The sheer number of cases on mis-service of the claim form this year indicate that, in all litigator’s offices, there should be large signs that state “serve the claim form properly and on time”.  Today we are looking at another…

PERMISSION TO APPEAL "SOME OTHER COMPELLING REASON" AND A FRIENDLY STATE

PERMISSION TO APPEAL “SOME OTHER COMPELLING REASON” AND A FRIENDLY STATE

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

CPR 52.6(1)(b) states that a court can give permission to appeal where ” there is some other compelling reason for the appeal to be heard”. That rule is rarely considered.  However we a direct consideration of that that rule in…

SERVICE POINTS 19: THE DEFENDANT WAS ALLOWED TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION DESPITE NOT USING PART 11 (AND, PERHAPS, A WORKING EXAMPLE OF WHY LITIGATORS NEED TO READ THIS BLOG...)

SERVICE POINTS 19: THE DEFENDANT WAS ALLOWED TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION DESPITE NOT USING PART 11 (AND, PERHAPS, A WORKING EXAMPLE OF WHY LITIGATORS NEED TO READ THIS BLOG…)

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are looking at another claim form case. This time the issue related to whether the defendant had made the correct application and, if it had not, whether it was prevented from arguing the court did not have jurisdiction.  What…

THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITOR HAS BEEN "SET UP", SECRETLY RECORDED AND TOLD US THINGS HE SHOULD NOT: NOW WE WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THOSE RECORDINGS: QUITE A CASE THIS...

THE DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITOR HAS BEEN “SET UP”, SECRETLY RECORDED AND TOLD US THINGS HE SHOULD NOT: NOW WE WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THOSE RECORDINGS: QUITE A CASE THIS…

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Summary judgment, Witness statements

Here we have an extraordinary case.  The claimants’ employed a private enquiry agent to meet, on a pretence, with the defendants’ solicitor.  That meeting was used by the enquiry agent to obtain information about the defendants’ case. It was videoed…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (3): DOES THE ABSENCE OF A PENAL NOTICE PREVENT COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS? ARE THERE TWO TIERS OF COURT ORDER? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS STRONG VIEWS…

November 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

Does the absence of a penal notice on a court order mean that a party in default cannot be subject to committal proceedings?  This was the question addressed by the Court of Appeal in this case.  The possibility that litigants…

MAZUR MATTERS 37: USEFUL LINKS:  NEW GUIDANCE FROM THE LAW SOCIETY

MAZUR MATTERS 37: USEFUL LINKS: NEW GUIDANCE FROM THE LAW SOCIETY

November 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

The Law Society has earlier issued two new documents which are guides to Mazur.  One is outside a paywall, the other is not. “Mazur – answering your questions” deals with many key issues. (Links are important on this topic -…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (1) CONTEMPT NEED NOT BE "CONTUMELIOUS" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS): WHY CHIEF CONSTABLES, CHIEF EXECUTIVES, MINISTERS OF STATE AND BOSSES EVERYWHERE NEED TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO LITIGATION

CONTEMPT OF COURT (1) CONTEMPT NEED NOT BE “CONTUMELIOUS” (WHATEVER THAT MEANS): WHY CHIEF CONSTABLES, CHIEF EXECUTIVES, MINISTERS OF STATE AND BOSSES EVERYWHERE NEED TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO LITIGATION

November 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am breaking down this important Court of Appeal decision into a number of parts. We have already looked at the judgment as to the numerous “misleading” witness statements that were filed.  The Court of Appeal also makes important observations…

APPEAL STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPELLANTS’ FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLIANT BUNDLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

All those involved in the appeal process, indeed litigation generally, are best advised to read this judgment.  It is about the standard the court’s expect when an appeal is being brought. It is also about procedural failures and failures to…

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Relief from sanctions

This year has see more than its fair share of cases relating to default, sanctions and wasted costs. Knowing what those cases are, the problems that arose, how they were caused and the results are essential skills for litigators.  More…

COURT CONSIDERS APPLICATION FOR FURTHER DISCLOSURE MADE ON THE THIRD DAY OF THE TRIAL: "THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE MANY MONTHS BEFORE..."

COURT CONSIDERS APPLICATION FOR FURTHER DISCLOSURE MADE ON THE THIRD DAY OF THE TRIAL: “THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE MANY MONTHS BEFORE…”

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

It is unusual for an application for further disclosure, particularly extensive disclosure, to be made part way through a trial. The judge considered such an application in this case.  This led to the obvious question – why wasn’t this application…

ANOTHER "BUNDLES" ISSUE: THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ON THE CITATION OF AUTHORITIES; "I'M PICKING UP BAD CITATIONS" - THE REMIX...

ANOTHER “BUNDLES” ISSUE: THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ON THE CITATION OF AUTHORITIES; “I’M PICKING UP BAD CITATIONS” – THE REMIX…

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is often worthwhile looking at short judgments or comments at the end of a case, particularly in the Court of Appeal. They sometimes contain little gems of  very useful information.  We see that here in the short judgment of…

SERVICE POINTS 18: DECISION TODAY:  THE CLAIMANT DID NOT ACTUALLY RECEIVE THE CLAIM FORM UNTIL AFTER IT EXPIRED, YET THE COURT OF APPEAL WAS UNYIELDING

SERVICE POINTS 18: DECISION TODAY: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT ACTUALLY RECEIVE THE CLAIM FORM UNTIL AFTER IT EXPIRED, YET THE COURT OF APPEAL WAS UNYIELDING

November 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

We are continuing our examination of the Court of Appeal judgment today in relation to service of the claim form.   The claimant’s solicitors received the claim form after the date it had expired. Nevertheless the Court of Appeal upheld the…

SERVICE POINTS 17:  BREAKING NEWS... IMPORTANT DECISION ON THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THE CLAIM FORM FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY

SERVICE POINTS 17: BREAKING NEWS… IMPORTANT DECISION ON THE DATE OF ISSUE OF THE CLAIM FORM FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY

November 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The procedural problems caused by service of the claim form continue unabated.  Here we look at a decision of the Court of  Appeal today which highlights the very real dangers for claimants. Mistakes or delays by the court service may…

MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT "WITHOUT MORE"?

MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT “WITHOUT MORE”?

November 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at case report which contains a reference to Mazur and appears to suggest that signature of an application by an unauthorised person means that the application is “liable to be struck out”.  As it turns out…

"LITIGANTS IN PERSON SHOULD BE WARY OF UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WHO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFEND OR PURSUE CASES BY REFERENCE TO SPURIOUS LEGAL ARGUMENTS, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE"

“LITIGANTS IN PERSON SHOULD BE WARY OF UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WHO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFEND OR PURSUE CASES BY REFERENCE TO SPURIOUS LEGAL ARGUMENTS, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE”

November 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

It is rare for this blog to look at judgments from other jurisdictions.  However some words from the High Court of Ireland caught my eye.  It offers advice, in particular, to litigants in person. (This is not a warning in…

THE CLAIMANT RELIED ON A FALSE AUTHORITY: THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE LITIGANT TO CHECK THE CITATION

THE CLAIMANT RELIED ON A FALSE AUTHORITY: THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE LITIGANT TO CHECK THE CITATION

November 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are looking again at the phenomenon of “false” authorities. However in this case the courts were more forgiving of the litigant who had relied on a non-existent case.  The judgment does, however, show the need for care in legal…

MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE

MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE

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

We continue with our rare trip inside the Houses of Parliament by looking at the response that the Minister for Courts and Legal Services to the letter from the  Chair of the Justice Committee.   (We are seeing how Mazur…

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR...

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR…

November 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Webinar

It is that time of year when we can look back and reflect on events of the previous 12 months. Here we are looking at what lessons can be learnt from cases on default and sanctions since November 2024.  As…

COST BITES 305: THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO AWARD COSTS AGAINST A PARTY WHEN TWO ACTIONS WERE "JOINED" AND NOT "CONSOLIDATED": AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION IN THE RULES

COST BITES 305: THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO AWARD COSTS AGAINST A PARTY WHEN TWO ACTIONS WERE “JOINED” AND NOT “CONSOLIDATED”: AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION IN THE RULES

November 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are looking at a case where the appellant was successful in overturning an award for costs made against him in relation to one set of proceedings.  The judgment highlights the important distinction between “joinder” and “consolidation”.  That distinction can…

MAZUR MATTERS 31:   THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD REVIEW OF "WHY MAZUR WAS A SURPRISE"  - AND WHAT CHANGED AFTERWARDS?

MAZUR MATTERS 31: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD REVIEW OF “WHY MAZUR WAS A SURPRISE” – AND WHAT CHANGED AFTERWARDS?

November 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The Legal Services Board has set out the scope of its review of “advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies”.   Stripped down to its basics the question being asked…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 34: APPEAL ALLOWED (IN PART) WHERE TRIAL JUDGE AWARDED DAMAGES BASED ON UNPLEADED ALLEGATIONS

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 34: APPEAL ALLOWED (IN PART) WHERE TRIAL JUDGE AWARDED DAMAGES BASED ON UNPLEADED ALLEGATIONS

November 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we have a case where the claimants’ case was based (in part) on conduct by one of the defendants that was not pleaded.   The defendant appealed on that basis.  On appeal the judge was not persuaded by the respondents’…

DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE:  SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?

DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?

November 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at a case where the defendants failed to comply with a peremptory order for disclosure.  The defences stood struck out.  The issue the judge had to determine was whether relief from sanctions should be granted. This in…

SERVICE POINTS 16:  DID THE COURT HAVE POWER TO STATE THAT SERVICE OF A CLAIM FORM AT THE HOUSE COMMONS COULD BE RATIFIED RETROSPECTIVELY?

SERVICE POINTS 16: DID THE COURT HAVE POWER TO STATE THAT SERVICE OF A CLAIM FORM AT THE HOUSE COMMONS COULD BE RATIFIED RETROSPECTIVELY?

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

We have already looked at this case at first instance, see Service Points 9,  the initial decision was considered by the Court of Appeal in the case we look at here.  The Court here was concerned with whether the courts…

COST BITES 303:  THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED

COST BITES 303: THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at a case involving a bill of costs that was wholly defective that the costs judge was invited to strike it out.  The judge came very close, but reduced the bill by 75% instead.    There…

AS IT STARTS TO GET DARK: LAWYERS HALLOWEEN STORIES: DIGGING UP THE PAST...

AS IT STARTS TO GET DARK: LAWYERS HALLOWEEN STORIES: DIGGING UP THE PAST…

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Well being

Way back in the mists of antiquity (2017) I invited lawyers on Twitter (Now “X”) to share their views on what scares the legal profession most.  The first post came from Megan Boyd (based in Atlanta, Georgia).  This shows that…

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking here at at case where an action was struck out because of  a failure to obtain permission of the court to issue proceedings. The judge rejected the claimant’s contention that the statute in question should be read…

MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 28: IT WAS “SLIGHTLY SURPRISING” THAT A PARALEGAL “DID NOT KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT APPLICABLE TO NON-SOLICITORS”

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Here we look at a judge’s comments outside the ambit of litigation.  Nevertheless it shows that the issue of professional regulation and the use of “non-authorised” employees within solicitor’s firms may well become a more important issue in the future….

MAZUR MATTERS 27: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: A USEFUL GUIDE FROM INSURERS:  PLUS THE FIRST "REAL WORLD" CASE WHERE MAZUR HAS LED TO A SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN COSTS

MAZUR MATTERS 27: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: A USEFUL GUIDE FROM INSURERS: PLUS THE FIRST “REAL WORLD” CASE WHERE MAZUR HAS LED TO A SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN COSTS

October 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Sanctions, Useful links

The commentary on Mazur continues.  Here I want to look at two useful links. The first relates to guidance given by an insurer. The second relates to the first report (I have seen) on Mazur having an impact on costs….

SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION MADE BY MISTAKE? A TEN YEAR OLD CASE THAT IS STILL OF INTEREST: CANDOUR HELPS A LOT

SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION MADE BY MISTAKE? A TEN YEAR OLD CASE THAT IS STILL OF INTEREST: CANDOUR HELPS A LOT

October 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

This is a case about mistakes in litigation and the rules relating to allowing the withdrawal of a pre-action admission.  The judgment was given 10 years ago, but arrived on BAILII today.  The issues raised here remain highly relevant.  In…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 33: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS STRIKING OUT OF SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES: "OVER-COMPLICATED", "UNCLEAR". "LACKING IN THE MOST BASIC INFORMATION NECESSARY" (OH AND MANY OF THE CLAIMS WERE UNPLEADED...)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 33: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS STRIKING OUT OF SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES: “OVER-COMPLICATED”, “UNCLEAR”. “LACKING IN THE MOST BASIC INFORMATION NECESSARY” (OH AND MANY OF THE CLAIMS WERE UNPLEADED…)

October 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Schedules, Striking out

It is rare for a schedule of damages to come under close scrutiny prior to the trial itself.   Here the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out large parts of the appellants’ claim for damages.  Many of the…

TAKING A CASE TO THE WIRE: TIME LIMITS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES: WHEN DOES TIME START TO RUN? WHY IS THIS RELEVANT TO YOU?

TAKING A CASE TO THE WIRE: TIME LIMITS IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CASES: WHEN DOES TIME START TO RUN? WHY IS THIS RELEVANT TO YOU?

October 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we are looking at a case where the issue of proceedings was left until the last day. There is nothing unusual in that on this blog. We are, however, looking at a criminal case, albeit a decision of the…

EXPERT WATCH 23: NOW THINGS GET EVEN MORE REMARKABLE: EXPERT WRITES TO THE COURT TO SAY "MY EVIDENCE WAS WRONG": REGULATORY BODY THINKS THE REPORT WAS VERY WRONG...

EXPERT WATCH 23: NOW THINGS GET EVEN MORE REMARKABLE: EXPERT WRITES TO THE COURT TO SAY “MY EVIDENCE WAS WRONG”: REGULATORY BODY THINKS THE REPORT WAS VERY WRONG…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The previous post recorded how it is still possible to be surprised by what goes on in litigation. We see that again here, but to a greater extent. After a trial and a judgment was given an expert wrote to…

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF...

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

No matter how long, and how much, you write about civil procedure cases can still come along which surprise – if not astonish. We have such a case here.  The judge found that, essentially, it was the client who played…

MEMBER NEWS: UPDATE ON THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINAR SERIES: THIS SITE WILL BE OFFLINE FOR AN HOUR ON THE 29th OCTOBER

MEMBER NEWS: UPDATE ON THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINAR SERIES: THIS SITE WILL BE OFFLINE FOR AN HOUR ON THE 29th OCTOBER

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Member news, Webinar

There are two pieces of news. Firstly the site is having a short “rest” on the 29th October, this is only for an hour – but it will be back newly invigorated.  Secondly a reminder of some of the webinars…

COST BITES 301: THE AARHUS COST CAP FIGURES ARE NOT SETT IN STONE: BUT IT VERY DIFFICULT TO PERSUADE A COURT TO CHANGE THEM

COST BITES 301: THE AARHUS COST CAP FIGURES ARE NOT SETT IN STONE: BUT IT VERY DIFFICULT TO PERSUADE A COURT TO CHANGE THEM

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

This may be the first time we have looked at the issue of costs and badgers.  We are looking at a case where the defendant sought to change the amounts of the “Aarhus cap” on the recoverability of costs in…

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL AND TO EXTEND TIME: THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK PERMISSION CAN EASILY BE MISSED: SOMETHING FOR WOULD BE APPELLANTS TO WATCH OUT FOR

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL AND TO EXTEND TIME: THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK PERMISSION CAN EASILY BE MISSED: SOMETHING FOR WOULD BE APPELLANTS TO WATCH OUT FOR

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The circumstances in which a judge at first instance can grant permission to appeal from their own decision are circumscribed by the rules.  Permission can only be given at the hearing itself, or any adjournment thereof.  The same applies to…

LITIGATORS: SLEEP LIKE A BABY NEXT YEAR BY NOT REPEATING ALL THE CLAIM FORM MISTAKES PEOPLE HAVE MADE THIS YEAR: WEBINAR 5th NOVEMBER 2025

LITIGATORS: SLEEP LIKE A BABY NEXT YEAR BY NOT REPEATING ALL THE CLAIM FORM MISTAKES PEOPLE HAVE MADE THIS YEAR: WEBINAR 5th NOVEMBER 2025

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Webinar

Needless to say there have been plenty of cases this year relating to service (or mis-service) of the claim form.  This webinar looks at cases over the past 12 months with the primary aim of ensuring that you are not…

THE RESPONDENTS' ARGUMENTS ABOUT FAILURES OF PROCEDURE WERE NOT "NIT PICKING": RATHER THEY SHOWED THAT THE APPLICATION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY BROUGHT AND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED...

THE RESPONDENTS’ ARGUMENTS ABOUT FAILURES OF PROCEDURE WERE NOT “NIT PICKING”: RATHER THEY SHOWED THAT THE APPLICATION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY BROUGHT AND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

There are often major differences of view as to the effect of non-compliance with the rules. We have such differences here.  The claimants, in default, regarded the respondents’ procedural objections as “nit-picking”. The judge, however, held that the default was…

HIGH COURT REFUSES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN SKELETON ARGUMENT WAS SERVED LATE: BREACHES OF EVEN A DAY OR TWO SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED WITH EQUANIMITY

HIGH COURT REFUSES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN SKELETON ARGUMENT WAS SERVED LATE: BREACHES OF EVEN A DAY OR TWO SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED WITH EQUANIMITY

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Written advocacy

If a skeleton argument is served late then relief from sanctions is required.  The case we are looking at here makes it clear that it is prudent to make a formal application rather than assume relief will be granted “on…

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Part 36

We are looking again at the case in which the claimant applied for permission to withdraw their Part 36 offer.  The claimant had capacity, however at the hearing it was argued that he came within the definition of “vulnerable” litigant…

LIGHT IN ALL THE HEAT: ENSURING THAT AN AUTHORISED PERSON HAS "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION": A PRACTICAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 31st OCTOBER 2025

LIGHT IN ALL THE HEAT: ENSURING THAT AN AUTHORISED PERSON HAS “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”: A PRACTICAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 31st OCTOBER 2025

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Webinar

There are many heated responses to the Mazur decision.  There are articles suggesting that the judge got the law wrong. (Apparently the judge should not have listened to the submissions of both the Law Society and SRA which supported his…

WHEN A RESPONDENT'S NOTICE IS REALLY A CROSS-APPEAL: SHOULD THE COURT GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ALLOW THE "APPEAL" TO BE ARGUED?

WHEN A RESPONDENT’S NOTICE IS REALLY A CROSS-APPEAL: SHOULD THE COURT GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ALLOW THE “APPEAL” TO BE ARGUED?

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Sometimes a respondent’s notice is really a cross-appeal attempting to disguise itself.  We are looking at such a case here.   The “respondent’s notice” was served late, and permission was given to serve it. However on closer examination at the appeal…

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (2): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (2): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We continue with the consideration of the recent case in which a claimant applied for permission to withdraw a Part 36 offer.  The judge also considered the relevant rules and case law in detail. (You need the court’s permission to…

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? IS A "CHANGE OF MIND" A "CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES": THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? IS A “CHANGE OF MIND” A “CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES”: THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

October 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Part 36

There are few cases which involve a claimant seeking to withdraw their own Part 36 offer we have a decision today here.  The claimant made an offer and attempted to withdraw is shortly afterwards. The defendant accepted the offer within…

OCCUPIER'S LIABILITY CASES IN THE COURTS: A PRACTICAL APPROACH: WEBINAR 29th OCTOBER 2025

OCCUPIER’S LIABILITY CASES IN THE COURTS: A PRACTICAL APPROACH: WEBINAR 29th OCTOBER 2025

October 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Personal Injury, Webinar, Witness statements

This webinar looks at how the courts are dealing with occupiers liability cases and the duty of care.  It takes a practical look at they way in which cases are decided and the factors which determine whether liability is established…

SERVICE POINTS 15: THE CLAIM FORM CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (2): LEAVING A CLAIM FORM OUT FOR THE DX TO COLLECT WAS NOT EFFECTIVE SERVICE

SERVICE POINTS 15: THE CLAIM FORM CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (2): LEAVING A CLAIM FORM OUT FOR THE DX TO COLLECT WAS NOT EFFECTIVE SERVICE

October 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The Court of Appeal has been busy recently with issues relating to service of the claim form. On the whole claimants (or rather their representatives) have not fared well.  Here we look at the claimant’s argument that leaving a claim…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 47 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

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

Join 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)

Top Posts

  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE "ON DEMAND"
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: "VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL"
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..

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.