Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Avoiding negligence claims
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM "FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT": THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM “FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT”: THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Here we look at a case where an unrepresented litigant’s action against five defendants was struck out because the Particulars of Claim did not show any legally recognisable case against any of the defendants. This judgment shows the importance of…

THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have seen examples of barristers getting into difficulties because of the misuse of AI.  The Bar Standards Handbook  gives 14 pages of useful guidance to the Bar. I have attempted to summarise the guidance here and provide some useful…

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 2: GUIDANCE AND CHECKLISTS ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM OTHER SOURCES...)

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 2: GUIDANCE AND CHECKLISTS ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM OTHER SOURCES…)

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is clear from recent developments that the use of AI can be useful in litigation, however it can also lead to major problems.  The new SRA Guidance recognises the issues in relation to the need to supervise AI use,…

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: THE KEY ELEMENTS, THE GUIDANCE AND THREE USEFUL CHECKLISTS

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: THE KEY ELEMENTS, THE GUIDANCE AND THREE USEFUL CHECKLISTS

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Last week we looked at the major changes and new elements of the SRA Guidance “Effective Supervision”.  The Guidance  contains a totally new section on supervision in litigation.   Clearly a detailed knowledge of this guidance is essential to all litigators…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT ARE THE RULES IF A COURT ORDER DOES NOT STATE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN ORDER FOR COSTS?

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT ARE THE RULES IF A COURT ORDER DOES NOT STATE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN ORDER FOR COSTS?

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Sometimes it may appear that this series is a bit too “basic”, dealing with things that (surely) everyone involves in litigation knows. However, more often than not, the topics are chosen because recent events have show that there is a…

FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS: ENSURING EVERYTHING GOES RIGHT: WEBINAR 17th JUNE 2026

FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS: ENSURING EVERYTHING GOES RIGHT: WEBINAR 17th JUNE 2026

June 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Webinar, Witness statements

Fatal accident litigation is fraught with procedural and evidential pitfalls. This webinar highlights the areas where cases most commonly go wrong and provides practical guidance on how to avoid costly mistakes.  It provides a comprehensive series of checklists of the…

MAZUR MATTERS 63:  THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: HIGHLIGHTING THE CHANGES AND THE NEW ELEMENTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO LITIGATORS

MAZUR MATTERS 63: THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: HIGHLIGHTING THE CHANGES AND THE NEW ELEMENTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO LITIGATORS

June 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The SRA have today published updated guidance on Effective Supervision.   There are changes and additions to the pre-existing guidance. Some of these are subtle, others are major. We will look at elements of the guidance in detail in later posts. …

WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A WITNESS STATEMENT FOR THEIR CLIENT: THEY MAY BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE, BUT IT IS A VERY DIFFERENT MATTER TO PROVIDING EVIDENCE FROM SOMEONE WITH DIRECT RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE

WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A WITNESS STATEMENT FOR THEIR CLIENT: THEY MAY BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE, BUT IT IS A VERY DIFFERENT MATTER TO PROVIDING EVIDENCE FROM SOMEONE WITH DIRECT RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE

June 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the second post on witness evidence and the preparation of witness statements today. It is in a very different context to the first.  Here we look at a case in the Intellectual Property List where a judge considered…

SERVICE POINTS 46: A CLAIMANT WHO HAS NOT SERVED THE CLAIM FORM IN TIME CANNOT RELY ON CPR 6.15 OR 6.16: ANOTHER ACTION COMES TO GRIEF...

SERVICE POINTS 46: A CLAIMANT WHO HAS NOT SERVED THE CLAIM FORM IN TIME CANNOT RELY ON CPR 6.15 OR 6.16: ANOTHER ACTION COMES TO GRIEF…

June 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This case emphasises a number of important points about service: (1) There is always a duty on a claimant to serve the claim form in time, no matter what type of proceedings; (2) when a claim form has not been…

PARTS OF A DEFENCE WERE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO REARGUE FACTUAL ISSUES THAT HAD BEEN DETERMINED BY A TRIBUNAL

PARTS OF A DEFENCE WERE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO REARGUE FACTUAL ISSUES THAT HAD BEEN DETERMINED BY A TRIBUNAL

June 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

Here we have a case where parts of a defence were struck out, in relation to two of the claimants, because of issue estoppel. The defence was trying to re-argue factual issues which had already been determined by a tribunal. …

PROVING THINGS 290: THE DEFENDANT HAS SUFFERED A LOSS BUT HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY EVIDENCE TO COURT TO PROVE IT...

PROVING THINGS 290: THE DEFENDANT HAS SUFFERED A LOSS BUT HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY EVIDENCE TO COURT TO PROVE IT…

June 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

It is wise to remember that a counterclaiming defendant has the same evidential burden in proving loss as a claimant.  Here the judge found that claimant in breach of duty – but found that there was insufficient evidence to prove…

CIVIL LITIGATION 2026: A TWELVE POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE UPDATED: 12 YEARS ON AND ALL OF THIS IS STILL RELEVANT

CIVIL LITIGATION 2026: A TWELVE POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE UPDATED: 12 YEARS ON AND ALL OF THIS IS STILL RELEVANT

June 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In July 2014 I wrote a 12 point “Survival Guide” for litigators. This was a guide to procedural safety following the Court of Appeal on from the decision in Denton.  Re-reading this today all the points remain relevant.  Today is…

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THE CLAIMANTS HAD ISSUED IN  THE WRONG COURT, USING THE WRONG METHOD? THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THE CLAIMANTS HAD ISSUED IN THE WRONG COURT, USING THE WRONG METHOD? THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

June 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

This is a judgment that bristles with procedural issues. The claimants had issued in the wrong court, using the wrong procedure. The defendant made applications which (initially) were in the wrong form. The judge had to consider whether the actions…

EXPERT WATCH 50: THE EXPERT SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HIS TRUE OPINIONS EARLIER - NOT WAITED UNTIL CROSS-EXAMINATION

EXPERT WATCH 50: THE EXPERT SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HIS TRUE OPINIONS EARLIER – NOT WAITED UNTIL CROSS-EXAMINATION

June 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

Experts faced with evidence that appears to contradict their earlier views often face a dilemma. In particular they need to consider whether their earlier conclusions remain valid.  We have an example here where the judge was critical of the expert’s…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE DUTY TO SERVE A NOTICE OF APPEAL "AS SOON AS IS PRACTICABLE"

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE DUTY TO SERVE A NOTICE OF APPEAL “AS SOON AS IS PRACTICABLE”

June 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

This post arises from the observations of the judge in a case we looked at last week.  In essence it is not enough to simply issue a notice of appeal or an application notice.  The rules require that you serve…

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2026

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2026

June 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Webinar

Expert evidence plays a critical and often decisive role in clinical negligence litigation, and the ability to assess such evidence is a core skill for litigators. This webinar examines the legal framework and case law governing the credibility and admissibility…

DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW

DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Webinar

Checklists are always a feature of discussions I have with publishers and legal professionals.  I have prepared have created a whole series of checklists for lawyers (9 in total)  and a series for experts (6),  plus a “Judicial Red Flags”…

SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE:  SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY...

SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE: SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY…

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This case, where judgment was given today,  is essential reading for anyone litigating using  CE-File. It is also essential to anyone involved in group litigation.  This is  a case where 5,000 claimants were refused relief from sanctions. That initial difficulty…

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS  (THERE IS NO "DEEMED ADMISSION") PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE "HALLUCINATED" "FICTITIOUS" RULE

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS (THERE IS NO “DEEMED ADMISSION”) PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE “HALLUCINATED” “FICTITIOUS” RULE

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

This case has two important practical points. Firstly (contrary to the case put forward by the claimant) a failure to respond to a Notice to Admit facts does not give rise to an “implied admission” by the recipient of the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: SOME DELAYS WERE UNEXPLAINED AND THERE WERE OTHER BREACHES OF THE RULES: SOME LESSONS ON COMPLIANCE HERE...

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: SOME DELAYS WERE UNEXPLAINED AND THERE WERE OTHER BREACHES OF THE RULES: SOME LESSONS ON COMPLIANCE HERE…

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

We are looking at an (unsuccessful) application for relief from sanctions in a family case.  A husband sought permission to appeal some 10 1/2 months out of time.  What is particularly interesting here are the judge accepted that some delay…

COST BITES 393: A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LAW FIRMS WAS VALID: THERE WAS NO BREACH (AND IF THERE WAS IT WAS NOT MATERIAL): FRESH OFF THE PRESS - JUDGMENT THIS AFTERNOON

COST BITES 393: A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LAW FIRMS WAS VALID: THERE WAS NO BREACH (AND IF THERE WAS IT WAS NOT MATERIAL): FRESH OFF THE PRESS – JUDGMENT THIS AFTERNOON

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Jamie Carpenter KC for drawing my attention to this judgment given this afternoon. It relates to an interesting dispute between law firms. The claimant had entered into a CFA with the defendant. The defendant argued that…

AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A "MINOR ERROR..."

AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A “MINOR ERROR…”

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at how a simple mistake in the naming of a file led to a potentially disastrous problem when it led to an appeal being out of time. The wrong documents were sent to the court when an…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at a recent decision that has major practical implications for  anyone making an application, or anyone disgruntled with a court decision.  The applicant asked, specifically, for an application to be considered on paper.  The matter was considered…

THE APIL FATAL ACCIDENTS WEBINAR SERIES 2026: SEVEN WEBINARS TO HELP NEGOTIATE THIS DIFFICULT AREA OF LAW AND PRACTICE

THE APIL FATAL ACCIDENTS WEBINAR SERIES 2026: SEVEN WEBINARS TO HELP NEGOTIATE THIS DIFFICULT AREA OF LAW AND PRACTICE

May 31, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Webinar, Witness statements

Fatal accident claims are among the most complex and high-stakes cases a  lawyer can handle. They are not simply personal injury claims in which the injured person has died. Fatal accident litigation is governed by a distinct legal framework, involves…

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026

May 29, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Webinar

There is no shortage of posts on this blog where judges have been critical of expert witnesses (and sometimes those who instruct them). This webinar examines how courts assess and evaluate expert evidence in personal injury litigation, with a particular…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY "LATE"? (MAY 2015)

THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)

May 29, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

If we have a theme for today it relates to applications to amend pleadings.  This is, needless to say, a regular topic on this site.  The issues and problems that litigants faced 11 years ago still occur in cases we…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 77: CASE STRUCK OUT: THERE WAS "INSUFFICIENT PLEADINGS OF FACT FROM WHICH IT COULD BE INFERRED THAT ANY OF THE ALLEGATIONS HAVE A REAL PROSPET OF SUCCESS"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 77: CASE STRUCK OUT: THERE WAS “INSUFFICIENT PLEADINGS OF FACT FROM WHICH IT COULD BE INFERRED THAT ANY OF THE ALLEGATIONS HAVE A REAL PROSPET OF SUCCESS”

May 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we look at a case where the Master struck out the claimants’ pleaded case alleging unlawful means conspiracy, breach of contract and a claim in negligence.  The Master held that that the pleadings were non-compliant and did not plead…

SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS

SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS

May 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Here we have another case of a failure to serve a claim form properly.  This time a local authority failed to serve interested parties to an appeal because, rather than sending the claim forms to them personally, they were sent…

SERVICE POINTS 42: A £82 MILLION POUND FAILS BECAUSE THE CLAIM FORM WAS SENT BY EMAIL TO SOLICITORS WHO HAD NOT STATED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT SERVICE: AN OLD ISSUE (AND A BIG ONE)

SERVICE POINTS 42: A £82 MILLION POUND FAILS BECAUSE THE CLAIM FORM WAS SENT BY EMAIL TO SOLICITORS WHO HAD NOT STATED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT SERVICE: AN OLD ISSUE (AND A BIG ONE)

May 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Service of the claim form

This will not be the only case about (mis) service of the claim form this week, however it may be the largest.  We have the “traditional” pattern of a claimant leaving service until the very last day and then serving…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND PREPARING FOR TRIAL: WEBINAR ON 29th MAY 2026: IT MAY BE A WHOLE BUNDLE OF FUN

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND PREPARING FOR TRIAL: WEBINAR ON 29th MAY 2026: IT MAY BE A WHOLE BUNDLE OF FUN

May 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Webinar

In Serra -v- Harvey [2024], wasted costs were ordered on an indemnity basis against the claimant’s solicitors because the lateness and condition of the trial bundles. The bundles were described as “haphazard”.  This is just one of numerous posts on…

THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE  - LANDING SOLICITORS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE AGAIN (AND DON'T BLAME THE AI FOR EVERYTHING - IT ACTUALLY GAVE OUT WARNINGS TO CHECK...)

THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE – LANDING SOLICITORS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE AGAIN (AND DON’T BLAME THE AI FOR EVERYTHING – IT ACTUALLY GAVE OUT WARNINGS TO CHECK…)

May 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

One day the incorrect use of AI to cite “hallucinated” authorities is going to ruin someone’s career. It may have done so already, there are a number of SRA investigations pending.   The example we look at here is highly educational…

BACK TO BASICS (BANK HOLIDAY) MONDAY: A REMINDER OF WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: THE PROFOUND DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THE COURT APPROACHES A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION

BACK TO BASICS (BANK HOLIDAY) MONDAY: A REMINDER OF WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: THE PROFOUND DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THE COURT APPROACHES A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION

May 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

It is important to remember the major difference in the court’s approach to a an application for an extension that is made ahead of the date of compliance compared to one that is made afterwards.  The governing principles are very different….

AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: WEBINAR 26th MAY 2026: NOW WITH ADDED CHECKLISTS

AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: WEBINAR 26th MAY 2026: NOW WITH ADDED CHECKLISTS

May 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar, Witness statements

Allegations of undersettlement of personal injury actions are not uncommon. There is an entire industry specialising in looking at solicitor’s files. This webinar aims to help practitioners avoid such assertions and be able to provide clear and robust replies if…

THE COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED DEFENDANT TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED "LATE": THE CRUCIAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN "IN TIME" AND "OUT OF TIME" APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME

THE COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED DEFENDANT TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED “LATE”: THE CRUCIAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN “IN TIME” AND “OUT OF TIME” APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME

May 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

I am grateful to Barrister Simon Brindle for sending me a copy of the judgment of this Court of Appeal judgment given yesterday.  It relates primarily to the major distinction between an application made “ahead” of time and one made…

YOU CAN'T DELIBERATELY DECIDE TO IGNORE COURT (OR TRIBUNAL) DIRECTIONS: HMRC INVOLVED IN "CONTUMELIOUS" CONDUCT, ITS (LATE) APOLOGY GIVEN LITTLE WEIGHT

YOU CAN’T DELIBERATELY DECIDE TO IGNORE COURT (OR TRIBUNAL) DIRECTIONS: HMRC INVOLVED IN “CONTUMELIOUS” CONDUCT, ITS (LATE) APOLOGY GIVEN LITTLE WEIGHT

May 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case of a litigant (the HMRC no less) making a deliberate decision to ignore Tribunal directions.  It then attempted to justify that decision by stating  “That was a deliberate and proportionate case management decision, taken in…

WOULD BE APPELLANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH SEVEN DAY DEADLINE: ARGUMENTS ABOUT "PUBLIC INTEREST" FAILS TO TAKE OFF: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING TIME LIMITS...

WOULD BE APPELLANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH SEVEN DAY DEADLINE: ARGUMENTS ABOUT “PUBLIC INTEREST” FAILS TO TAKE OFF: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING TIME LIMITS…

May 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where the “would be” appellant failed to obtain permission to appeal out of time.  They failed to notice that the time limits for appealing this specific type of decision had been changed two months prior…

MAZUR MATTERS 62: THE REVISED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: SOME SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS

MAZUR MATTERS 62: THE REVISED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: SOME SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS

May 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a revised version of the Court of Appeal judgment in Mazur.  Some paragraphs were amended slightly (but significantly). These amendments do not appeal to have made their way to the version of the judgment that is publicly available….

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 75:  A CLAIMANT DOES NOT ALWAYS NEED TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR INTEREST: AN INTERESTING POINT... BUT BE VERY WARY...

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 75: A CLAIMANT DOES NOT ALWAYS NEED TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR INTEREST: AN INTERESTING POINT… BUT BE VERY WARY…

May 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Interest, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we look at an argument that a claimant was not entitled to interest because it was not pleaded. The judge rejected the argument on two grounds. Firstly that CPR 16 does not apply to Part 8 claims; secondly that…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 74: A PARTY CANNOT SIMPLY SEEK TO AMEND THE LIST OF ISSUES TO INCLUDE AN ISSUE THAT IT HAS NEVER PLEADED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 74: A PARTY CANNOT SIMPLY SEEK TO AMEND THE LIST OF ISSUES TO INCLUDE AN ISSUE THAT IT HAS NEVER PLEADED

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we have an unusual case in that the defendant, rather than seeking to amend its defence, sought permission to amend the list of issues to enable it to argue a new point which (the judge found) had not been…

WEBINARS AVAILABLE ON DEMAND: WITNESS STATEMENTS; MAZUR; INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION AND PART 36: A HEADY BREW TO LIGHTEN UP ANY LITIGATOR'S DAY...

WEBINARS AVAILABLE ON DEMAND: WITNESS STATEMENTS; MAZUR; INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION AND PART 36: A HEADY BREW TO LIGHTEN UP ANY LITIGATOR’S DAY…

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar, Witness statements

Four webinars are now available “on demand” from Civil Litigation Brief: PD57AC; Mazur in the Court of Appeal; Informing the Client about the Costs of Litigation; Part 36 recent developments. THE COSTS (The costs are £75.00 plus VAT if you…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 73: COURT STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR £2.1 MILLION FOLLOWING McLAREN CATCHING FIRE: THE CASE WAS NOT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 73: COURT STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR £2.1 MILLION FOLLOWING McLAREN CATCHING FIRE: THE CASE WAS NOT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED

May 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Here we have a case where the judge considers in considerable detail the principles relating to pleading, the striking out of pleadings, and the possibility of being allowed to amend.  None of these favoured the claimant. “It is not sufficient…

AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF:  WEBINAR 26th MAY 2026

AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF: WEBINAR 26th MAY 2026

May 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Personal Injury, Webinar

This webinar examines claims of under-settlement brought against claimant solicitors, focusing on how courts determine whether professional negligence has occurred in the handling, settlement, or litigation of a case. It explores key case law where negligence was both established and…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 72: THE COURT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE CLAIMANTS A "FALL BACK" POSITION OF A SECOND HEARING: "A TRIAL IS THE FIRST AND LAST NIGHT OF THE SHOW; IT IS NOT A DRESS REHEARSAL"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 72: THE COURT WOULD NOT ALLOW THE CLAIMANTS A “FALL BACK” POSITION OF A SECOND HEARING: “A TRIAL IS THE FIRST AND LAST NIGHT OF THE SHOW; IT IS NOT A DRESS REHEARSAL”

May 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we have a situation which presents a real dilemma for those seeking, and pleading, a claim for damages.  In this case there were a large number of permutations in the claimants’ claim for damages. Only some of these had…

THE COURT HAS NO POWER TO EXTEND TIME FOR ISSUE WHEN A SOLICITOR WISHES TO CHALLENGE A SRA INTERVENTION (AND WHY IT IS ADVISABLE TO PUT ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION ON THE CLAIM FORM...)

THE COURT HAS NO POWER TO EXTEND TIME FOR ISSUE WHEN A SOLICITOR WISHES TO CHALLENGE A SRA INTERVENTION (AND WHY IT IS ADVISABLE TO PUT ALL THE NECESSARY INFORMATION ON THE CLAIM FORM…)

May 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are used to looking at some extremely tight timelines on this blog, in particular in relation to issue and service.  Here we have a case where the court found that the court has no power at all to extend…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE RIGHT OF A DEFENDANT TO ASK FOR A CLAIM FORM TO BE SERVED: CPR 7.7 CONSIDERED

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE RIGHT OF A DEFENDANT TO ASK FOR A CLAIM FORM TO BE SERVED: CPR 7.7 CONSIDERED

May 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

We have had two cases this year that deal with the provisions of CPR 7.7.  A rule that allows a defendant to serve a notice requiring service of a claim form.  It is worth knowing that this rule exists and…

A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...

A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE…

May 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we are not looking at a judgment as such but the reasons for an order made yesterday in the High Court. The court struck out an action and ordered that the claimants’ solicitors pay £900,000 on account of costs. …

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU “OWN” IT…

May 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are looking at another case where the judge has expressed major concerns about the use of Artificial Intelligence in the preparation of documents for the court.  The situation is now a (depressingly) familiar one where the use of AI…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS IN CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 19th MAY 2026: USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRES AND CHECKLISTS INCLUDED

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS IN CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 19th MAY 2026: USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRES AND CHECKLISTS INCLUDED

May 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Personal Injury, Webinar, Witness statements

Claims for loss of earnings are a critical component of many personal injury and civil litigation cases, yet they are also among the most vulnerable to failure. Poorly evidenced claims, misunderstanding of legal principles, or flawed calculations can lead not…

SERVICE POINTS 41: THE DEFENDANTS REQUIRED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION FOLLOWING INVALID SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A POINT FOR PRACTITIONERS TO WATCH...

SERVICE POINTS 41: THE DEFENDANTS REQUIRED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION FOLLOWING INVALID SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A POINT FOR PRACTITIONERS TO WATCH…

May 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Here we have a case where the defendants created unnecessary difficulties for themselves when taking a point as to invalid service of the claim form. The claim form was not properly served.  The defendants acknowledged service indicating that they were…

SERVICE POINTS 40: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT VALID NEITHER WAS SERVICE AT THE "LAST KNOWN ADDRESS": THE CLAIMANT HAD TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE AS TO HIS STATE OF KNOWLEDGE

SERVICE POINTS 40: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT VALID NEITHER WAS SERVICE AT THE “LAST KNOWN ADDRESS”: THE CLAIMANT HAD TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE AS TO HIS STATE OF KNOWLEDGE

May 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Witness statements

We are looking at a case that bristles with procedural points, including several issues relating to valid service. Here we look at just one of those issues – whether proceedings had been validly served when sent by email or to…

1 2 … 22 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES 402: DOES THE FACT THAT LEGAL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID BY RELATIVES MEAN THAT A RESPONDENT IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS? THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE CONSIDERED
  • ASSESSORS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN ADMIRALTY CASES: WHY WERE THEY NECESSARY? APPELLANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED FROM THAT SINKING FEELING …
  • DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: THE SOLICITORS CONDUCT WAS A “MATTER OF VERY REAL CONCERN” – BUT THE APPLICATION WAS GRANTED
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM “FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT”: THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT
  • THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.