Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Arbitration,
COST BITES 178: VALIDITY AND ENFORCEABILITY OF CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT UPHELD ON APPEAL

COST BITES 178: VALIDITY AND ENFORCEABILITY OF CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT UPHELD ON APPEAL

August 19, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Arbitration,, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Finnan v Candey Ltd [2024] EWHC 2157 (Ch) HHJ Cadwaller dismissed an appeal against a finding that a solicitor and client had entered into a valid contentious business agreement.   The judge held that the finding below, that the appellant…

WHEN REMOTE HEARINGS GO WRONG: AND STRUGGLING THROUGH TO PUT THEM RIGHT - AT WHOSE COSTS?

WHEN REMOTE HEARINGS GO WRONG: AND STRUGGLING THROUGH TO PUT THEM RIGHT – AT WHOSE COSTS?

June 17, 2020 · by gexall · in Arbitration,, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content, Remote hearings

I often listen to, and read, official statements about remote hearings with a degree of scepticism.   The impression is given that things are going smoothly. The reality is that things are often going awry and it is taking a great…

THE COVERT RECORDING OF AN EXPERT'S EXAMINATION - THE SEQUEL: DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO OBTAIN NEW EXPERT

THE COVERT RECORDING OF AN EXPERT’S EXAMINATION – THE SEQUEL: DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO OBTAIN NEW EXPERT

May 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Arbitration,, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In October last year I wrote about the case of Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB).  The claimant recorded her consultation with the defendant’s medical expert and was given permission to produce these in evidence.  That case has…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 3: A JUDGMENT FROM TODAY: CREDIBILITY A CENTRAL PART OF THE CASE

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 3: A JUDGMENT FROM TODAY: CREDIBILITY A CENTRAL PART OF THE CASE

March 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Arbitration,, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the third post today about the subject of the assessment of witness credibility. By a curious piece of good planning it comes from a judgment today in  Jiangsu Shagang Group Co Ltd v Loki Owning Company Ltd [2018] EWHC…

RECOVERING LITIGATION FUNDING COSTS: A HIGH COURT CASE -BUT ABOUT ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

October 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Arbitration,, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Professor Dominic Regan and Nicholas Bacon QC for sending me a copy of the decision in Essar Oilfields -v- Norscot [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm).A decision of His Honour Judge Waksman QC sitting as a Judge of…

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

  • WEBINAR ON PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: 9th SEPTEMBER 2026: USEFUL GUIDANCE, CHECKLISTS AND QUESTIONNAIRES
  • SHOULD (OR CAN) THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE WHEN THE PROPOSED DEFENDANT IS BASED IN ITALY? ANOTHER PAD APPLICATION COMES TO GRIEF…
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY:”WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THINGS GO WRONG BLAME THE SOLICITOR” (SEPTEMBER 2016)
  • SHOULD THE COURT ORDER PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE? THE JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT SATISFIED AND THE COURT WOULD NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN ANY EVENT
  • COST BITES 446 : SHOULD THE COURT HAVE MADE A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER? SHOULD THE APPELLANT HAVE BEEN CROSS-EXAMINED AND WAS THE COURT BOUND TO ACCEPT HIS EVIDENCE?

Top Posts

SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT, DENTON AND DELAY: SHOULD THE COURT REFUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIEF BECAUSE THEY HAD CAUSED UNNECESSARY DELAY AND COSTS?
DEALING WITH FISH FILES, PROCRASTINATION AND DELAY: THE LITIGATOR'S FRIEND: A REMINDER OF USEFUL LINKS, POSTS AND GUIDANCE AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: "BACKDATING LETTERS" TO DELIBERATELY MISLEAD COULD COST YOU: £4.58 MILLION IN THIS CASE: (METADATA COMES INTO PLAY NOW)
COST BITES 443: USEFUL CHECKLISTS: A CHECKLIST ON COSTS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR CASES (FOR CLAIMANTS)
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW SERIES 4: A RECAP OF THE PREVIOUS SERIES AND THE DEADLY SINS OF ADVOCATES: DON'T BE CONFUSING OR BORING

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.