Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Civil Procedure » Page 47

THE DANGERS OF NOT PAYING THE CORRECT COURT FEE: CASES BARRED BY LIMITATION BECAUSE WRONG COURT FEE WAS PAID

January 6, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Richard Lewis & Others -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch) Mr John Male QC   summary judgment was given for the defendants on the grounds that a deliberate decision to pay an incorrect court fee on issue meant…

INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS, A "CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE" AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE

January 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The decision of District Judge Hickman in the small claims case of Thakar -v- The Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EW Misc B44 is one that is likely to attract a lot of attention given that it was a…

USING WITNESS STATEMENTS PREPARED IN ANOTHER ACTION: WHEN IS A "HEARING HELD IN PUBLIC"

January 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

CPR 32.12 prevents witness statements served in an action being used for any other purpose.  However there is an exception when a statement is “put in evidence at a hearing held in public”.  This issue was considered in Kimathi -v- Foreign…

TEN NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS FOR LITIGATORS IN 2016

December 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Damages, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Proportionality, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Service of the claim form, Statements of Case, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Some resolutions to keep you prosperous and out of difficulties in 2016. (Happy New Year) 1. NEVER, EVER, GUESS ABOUT A LIMITATION PERIOD (OR TAKE A CLIENT’S WORD FOR IT) Litigators of all types must have a clear idea about…

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2015: POETRY, CARPET BOMBING AND DISAPPEARING EXPERTS

December 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Members Content, QOCS, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

We civil litigators cannot be left out of the, apparently universal, need for  an annual review. The annual review last year was headed with the words “prolixity”, “sanctions” and creative writing.  Here we look at poetry, carpet bombing and disappearing…

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CONTEMPORARY DOCUMENTS 2: A USEFUL COUNTERBALANCE

December 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized, Witness statements

A post earlier this month looked at a case where the judge favoured the witness evidence over a written medical record.  The decision in Grimstone -v- Epsom & St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 3756 (QB) is a…

THE GAME MUST BE WORTH THE CANDLE: ACTION STOPPED IN ITS TRACKS BECAUSE THE CLAIMANT HAD NOTHING TO GAIN

December 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

In IG Index Ltd -v- Cloete [2015] EWHC 3698 (QB) HHJ Richard Parkes QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) struck out an action on the grounds that the claimant had nothing to gain. KEY POINTS The court…

SOME WITNESSES MAY NOT BE GOOD HISTORIANS BUT GOOD HISTORIANS CANNOT BE WITNESSES

December 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Kimathi -v- Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2015]EWHC 3432 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart considered a number of issues relating to witness statements. Here we consider whether the evidence of historians is admissible.  Other aspects of this case will be examined…

YOU DON'T HAVE TO CLAIM INTERLOCUTORY RELIEF TO BE ENTITLED TO DAMAGES FOR BREACH

December 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Energysolutions EU Limited -v- Nuclear Decommissioning Authority [2015] EWCA Civ 1262 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of whether it is necessary for a party to litigate in order to be entitled to claim damages. The case concerns…

STRIKING OUT FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION (OR HADRIAN'S WALL IS THERE FOR A PURPOSE YOU KNOW)

December 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Jurisdiction,, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal decision in Cook -v- Virgin Media Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 1287 is one that needs to be read very carefully. It is one of those cases that could lead to a whole new branch of satellite…

"TOTALLY HOPELESS" APPLICATION FOR DISCLOSURE;INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS;APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION REFUSED:ALL LEGAL LIFE IS HERE

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in London Borough of Bromley -v- Heckel [2015] EWHC encompasses many of the themes regularly discussed in this blog. Proceedings were issued late;there was an inappropriate application for disclosure;the witness evidence was inadequate. Finally…

NO SPECIAL RULES FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: COSTS DO NOT FOLLOW THE EVENT FOLLOWING UNREASONABLE CONDUCT

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Litigants in person, Members Content, Uncategorized

Master Mathews faced an unusual scenario in Jones -v- Longley [2015] EWHC 3362 (Ch).  This case highlights the fact that litigants in person are not subject to any special rules and are liable to have orders for costs made against…

IS AN EXPERT REALLY NECESSARY? TWO RECENT CASES

December 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The determination of the courts to restrict the use of expert evidence can be seen by the fact that the text of CPR 35.1 appears under the heading “duty to restrict expert evidence”. The rule itself states “Expert evidence shall be…

BE CAREFUL WHERE YOU SERVE A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT: PAYING PARTY ESTOPPED FROM TAKING A POINT AS TO SERVICE

November 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents, Uncategorized

In Edray Ltd -v- Canning [2015] EWHC 2744 (Ch) Stephen Jourdan QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered an issue relating to estoppel and waiver when a Notice of Commencement had not been properly served. “The bill of…

SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT WHEN THERE WERE ALLEGED DISPUTES OF FACT: DON'T PARK THE CAR

November 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

Is it prudent to apply for summary judgment when there are alleged disputes of fact?  I am grateful to my colleague Colm  Nugent for sending me a copy of the judgment of  Mr Justice Cooke in Price -v- Euro Car…

THE ALDI PRINCIPLE AND SECOND ACTIONS: A STING IN THE TAIL

November 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Second set of proceedings, Uncategorized

In Chamonix Private Equity LLP -v- Caledonia Investments plc [2015] EWHC 3290 (Comm) Mr Justice Knowles noted that, in the absence of prior notification, it was going to be difficult for a claimant to bring a second action against different…

PROPORTIONALITY AND SURVIVAL FOR LITIGATORS 4: CLAIM ONLY WHAT YOU CAN PROVE

November 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

Proportionality is, mostly, about money.  The problems that proportionality causes increase  in those cases  where the sums recovered are much less than those originally sought.    The over-claiming of damages is a dangerous tactic for many reasons. Not least it…

CPR 3.10 STOPS A CLAIM FROM SINKING: USING THE WRONG FORM NOT FATAL TO AN ACTION

October 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In LD Commodities Rice Merchandising LLC -v- The Owners and/or Charterers of the Vessel Styliani Z [2015 ] EWHC 3060 (Admlty) Mr Justice Teare considered a case where the claimant used the wrong form to issue an action, this could…

AN OFFER IS NOT AN ADMISSION: HIGH COURT REJECTS APPLICATION FOR JUDGMENT ON ADMISSIONS

October 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Admissions, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The previous post looked at the decision Mr Justice Coulson in The Dorchester Group Ltd -v- Kier Construction Limited [2015] EWHC 3051 (TCC) in relation to disclosure.  Here we look at the decision in relation to the claimant’s application for…

THE HUMBLE CASE SUMMARY: A NEGLECTED ART: I'M ON THE LOOKOUT FOR EXAMPLES OF BEST PRACTICE

October 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The New Law Journal last month carried an important article from District Judge Nigel Law about his experience with case summaries in the county court.  The case summaries he found were too long and rarely useful.  This set me looking…

ADJOURNMENTS AND DISCRETION: DECISION NOT TO ADJOURN BANKRUPTCY PETITION UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

October 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Edginton -v- Sekhon [2015] EWCA Civ 816 the Court of Appeal refused to overturn the judge’s decision not to adjourn a bankruptcy petition. “Delay is inimical to all forms of litigation and especially so in a collective enforcement process…

DO FIXED COSTS APPLY TO PORTAL CASES ALLOCATED TO THE MULTI TRACK? A COUNTY COURT DECISION – THAT SAYS THAT THEY DO

October 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Quader -v- Esure Services Limited (Birmingham County Court 15th October 2015) His Honour Judge David Grant considered the issue of whether fixed costs applied to a portal case that was transferred to the Multi Track. THE CASE The judge…

SUING OR DEFENDING ON BEHALF OF AN ESTATE OR TRUST FUND: DID YOU KNOW YOUR COSTS BUDGETS MUST BE FILED WITH THE PLEADINGS?

October 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

A solicitor has pointed out to me the surprise provisions of Practice Direction 3F – on Costs Capping.  The title of  the Practice Directions is deceptive. There are also mandatory provisions in relation to the filing of costs budgets at…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO ALLOW APPEAL WHERE RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURE TO GIVE TIMEOUS NOTICE OF FUNDING

October 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In its judgment today in  Mischon De Reya -v- Caliendo [2015] EWCA Civ 1029 the Court of Appeal refused the Defendant’s appeal where a claimant had been granted relief from sanctions following a failure to give proper notice of funding….

SERVICE BY E-MAIL: ALLOWED BY THE HIGH COURT SO THAT INJUNCTION COULD BE EFFECTIVE

October 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

In JPH -v- XYZ [2015] EWHC (a decision made this Saturday!) Mr Justice Popplewell made an order allowing service by e-mail. THE CASE The claimant was bringing an injunction to prevent “revenge porn”. An application was made without notice to…

WHEN LAW AND POLITICS COLLIDE : IT'S ALL ABOUT SERVICE

October 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

It is rare for cases about service of the claim form to reach the headlines. This, however, is what happened in Ireland -v- Dorries [2015] EWHC 2781 (QB). Although service here relates to service of an Election Petition the court…

REFUSAL TO REALLOCATE: DISTRICT JUDGES WILL NOT ACT AS THE "COURT OF APPEAL" IN ALLOCATION DECISIONS

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Williams -v- Santander UK PLC [2015] EW Misc B37(CC) District Judge Stamenkovich considered an application to re-allocate a case from the small claims track. “I can see no reason to sit as a Court of Appeal from my fellow…

WHEN DOES INTEREST BEGIN TO RUN ON COSTS? AN IMPORTANT DECISION

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Involnert Management Inc -v- Aprilgrange Limited [2015] EWHC 2834 (Comm) Mr Justice Legatt addressed the issues of when interest runs on costs. The problem arose because interest under the Judgments Act 1838 carries interest at 8%. Interest on costs…

STRIKING OUT AT TRIAL BECAUSE THE CASE WAS A MESS: A WARNING FOR THOSE WHO WANT LIFE WITHOUT LAWYERS

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

On a day when the Lord Chief Justice has stated that the legal system must adapt to life without lawyers. It is interesting to read this report of the problems caused by litigants in person. It has kindly been provided…

SERVED A COPY CLAIM FORM BY MISTAKE? THERE MAY BE A WAY OUT: BUT BE CAREFUL

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In United Utilities Group PLC -v- Hart (HH Judge Wood, Liverpool County Court, 24th September 2015*) a claimant was granted a “reprieve” after having served a photocopy of the claim form by mistake.  However this is another one of those…

THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE LIMITATION ACT: DELAY WHEN APPLYING TO SET JUDGMENT ASIDE

October 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Judgment, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Blakemores LDP -v- Scott [2015] EWCA Civ 999 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to date of knowledge for the purpose of  s.14A of the Limitation Act 1980 . The court also considered the impact of delay when…

LIQUIDATORS CLAIMED £1.1 MILLION IN COSTS: NO ORDER FOR COSTS MADE: NO ROBIN HOOD ORDER HERE

October 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Anton Smith of Ashton Bond Gigg Solicitors for sending me details of the decision of Mr Registrar Jones  In Brooks & Willetts (liquidators or Robin Hood Centre Plc) -v- Armstrong 2015 EWHC 2289 (Ch) a copy…

DISPUTES OF FACT IN SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATIONS: THE APPROPRIATE TEST

October 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

In Optaglio Limited -v- Tethal [2015] EWCA Civ 1002 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of how far a judge can determine disputed issues of fact in a summary judgment application. THE CASE The claimant was appealing an order…

CASE STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO GIVE DISCLOSURE IN RELATION TO LATER ACCIDENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

October 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Uncategorized

In Ali -v- CIS General Insurance 2015 WL 5037781 His Honour Judge Cryan upheld a decision striking out a claim for failure to comply with disclosure. “The failure to comply with the order for disclosure was a serious failure to…

CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF 20 YEARS AGO: ANY LESSONS FOR TODAY?

CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF 20 YEARS AGO: ANY LESSONS FOR TODAY?

October 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I doubt whether anyone knew what a “blog” was 20 years ago. However at that time Civil Litigation Brief was a monthly column in the Solicitors Journal.  It is interesting to see how much (or how little) matters have moved…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1st OCTOBER 2015: MEET PRECEDENT Q

September 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

A reminder that there are new rules coming into force today, together with some changes to the Practice Directions. WHERE TO FIND THEM The civil procedure rules are here The amendments to the Practice Directions are here 81st Update PD Making…

RESPONDENT TO APPLICATION TO AMEND PLEADINGS ORDERED TO PAY COSTS BECAUSE THEY SHOULD HAVE CONSENTED

September 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Tobias Haynes from Regulatory Legal solicitors for sending me details of a judgment given today in relation to the costs of amendment. This is based on Tobias’ note of the judgment which was given today (30th…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM; RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND CHALLENGING THE JURISDICTION: A COMPLEX MIX?

September 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

The decision of Judge Hacon in Cant -v- Hertz Corporation [2015] EWHC 2617 (Ch) raises some interesting issues.  However, equally interesting, are the issues that were not addressed. In particular the issues relating to the applicability of CPR Part 11…

DEFENDANT COUNTERCLAIMING EXEMPLARY DAMAGES AGAINST FRAUDULENT CLAIMANTS: AN INTERESTING REPORT

September 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is a report in the DWF update section of the case of Akhtar & Khan -v- Ball, a decision of HHJ Gregory on 10.7.15. It raises an interesting issue in relation to a counterclaim by a defendant faced with…

WHOSE WITNESS STATEMENT IS IT ANYWAY? WELL THE SOLICITOR DRAFTED IT FOR ME

September 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Blair in Barrett -v- Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 2627 (QB) deals with many complex issues of causation and law in a difficult clinical negligence case. However I want to deal…

COMMITTAL APPLICATION REFUSED BECAUSE OF LONGSTANDING DEFECTS IN COURT FORM

September 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Re: Dad Application to commit Muhammad Nawaz Chaudry to prison [2015] EWHC 2655 (Fam) Mr Justice Holman refused an application to commit a respondent to prison on the grounds that the standard form of collection order did not comply…

CHILDREN AND SUCCESS FEES PART 2: WHAT SUCCESS FEE WAS REASONABLE?

September 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

We looked earlier at the decision of the Regional Cost Judge Lumb in the case of A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th August 2015). As a result of that case the decision of the success…

WHAT A DIFFERENCE A PAGE MAKES: COURT WOULD NOT RECONSIDER JUDGMENT BECAUSE TRIAL BUNDLE WAS MISSING A PAGE

September 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Absolute Lofts South West London Limited -v- Artisan Home Improvements [2015] EWHC 2632 (IPEC) the claimant had missed a crucial page from the trial bundle. His Honour Judge Hacon refused an application to reconsider his judgment on damages.  If anything showed…

GUIDANCE TO EXPERTS: CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL: WHO DOES AN EXPERT "REPRESENT"?

September 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

It is rare that lawyers can look to the British Dental Journal for advice on procedure and evidence.  However there is a beautifully phrased letter in the British Dental Journal “reviewing a review”. THE LETTER The writer was commenting on…

ADMINISTRATIVE COURT AWARDS NOTIONAL COSTS: THE PRICE TO PAY FOR THE ABSENCE OF A COSTS SCHEDULE

September 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is an interesting exchange at the end of the judgment of Mr Justice Dove in The Queen on the application of the Solicitors Regulation Authority -v- Imran [2015] EWHC 2572 (Admin). A REMINDER This is an example of the…

CIVIL JUSTICE STATISTICS: APRIL TO JUNE 2015

September 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statistics, Uncategorized

The Ministry of Justice have published Civil Justice statistics for April to June 2015. Here are some key points NUMBERS OF CLAIMS In April to June 2015, courts dealt with around 366,000 claims, 34,000 allocations, 66,000 defences and around 194,000 judgments. The…

BOOK REVIEW: OCCUPIERS, HIGHWAYS AND DEFECTIVE PREMISES CLAIMS: WILL IT STOP YOUR CLAIMS SLIPPING UP?

BOOK REVIEW: OCCUPIERS, HIGHWAYS AND DEFECTIVE PREMISES CLAIMS: WILL IT STOP YOUR CLAIMS SLIPPING UP?

September 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

Law books nowadays are not reviewed enough. Particularly practitioner’s texts.  Given that there are precious few legal bookshops in which people can browse it is nice to see s a review now and again. I have been sent a copy…

DELAY AND STRIKING OUT FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS: SOME INTERESTING LESSONS

September 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Master Bowles in Solland International Ltd -v- Clifford Harris & Co [2015] EWHC 2018 (Ch) contains several matters of interest to litigators. Not only the fact that the action was struck out but some of the allegations…

A FAILURE TO DISCLOSE CAN BE JUST AS TELLING AS DISCLOSURE ITSELF: EVIDENCE, INFERENCES AND THE BLUE ANGEL CASE

August 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Robin Hollington QC (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) in Davy -v- Croxen [2015] EWHC 2372 (Ch) (“The Blue Angel case”) contains some illuminating observations about the practicalities and costs of disclosure and…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN THE TCC: LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in North Midland Construction plc -v- Geo Networks Ltd [2015] EWHC 2384 (TCC) provides an object lesson in the dangers of delaying service of the particulars of claim. THE CASE The claimant issued two…

← Previous 1 … 46 47 48 … 61 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

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

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)

Top Posts

  • COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF "COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS": THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 2: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PD57AC: "HE KNOWS NOT OF WHAT HE SPEAKS"

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.