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 48

BANKRUPTCY AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANT: 10 KEY POINTS

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The post about Eatons -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC led to some interesting discussions and raises some important issues. The claimant had been made bankrupt after he was injured. His lawyers overlooked this, issued proceedings, succeeded in a trial on…

BANKRUPTCY OF CLAIMANT DID NOT RENDER ACTION INVALID OR AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

August 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Eaton -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC (30th April 2015) (reported today on Bailli) His Honour Judge Keyser QC had to consider the effect of bankruptcy upon the validity of a claim. “It is remarkable that the case had proceeded…

QOCS, STRIKING OUT AND THE LIABILITY TO PAY IN FULL: A COUNTY COURT DECISION

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

I am grateful to Colm Nugent of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me a copy of the judgment in Wall -v- British Canoe Union. A decision of HH Judge Lopez in Birmingham County Court on the 30th July 2015.  The judgment…

ORDERING SECURITY FOR COSTS, THIRD PARTY ACTIONS AND THE COSTS BUDGET

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

How important is an approved costs budget in determining the sum to be ordered by way of security for costs? This was an issue considered by Mr Justice Andrew Smith in Sarpd Oil International Ltd -v- Addax Energy [2015] EWHC…

WRITTEN ADVOCACY: CANDOUR & CONCISION ESSENTIAL GUIDANCE FROM CANADA

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

One of the advantages of writing a blog is that you can point out useful posts and articles. Anyone involved in legal argument benefit the guidance by John L Laskin J.A. in Forget the Wind-Up and Make the Pitch Some…

PERMISSION TO APPEAL CANNOT BE OPEN-ENDED: HIGH COURT DECISION

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In  Ghura -v- Dalal [2015] EWHC 2385 Mr Justice Norris rejected the idea that time for appealing could be open-ended or ambiguous in its scope. KEY POINTS The Court does not have power to extend time for appealing “generally”. In…

ALDI; "SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS" AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANTS ALLOWED TO SHOP AROUND?

August 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Knowles DEB in Otkritie Capital International Ltd -v- Threadneedle Asset Management Ltd [2015] EWHC 2329 (Comm) contains some important observations for all those involved in litigation, particularly commercial litigation.  It also provides a reminder that…

SETTING OFF INTEREST AGAINST AN INTERIM PAYMENT: A HIGH COURT DECISION

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

The judgment of Mrs Justice Cox in Manna -v- Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2279 (QB) is a veritable goldmine for anyone who writes about civil procedure or personal injury damages.  One of the, many, issues…

THAT "PARTIAL" ADMISSION: IT IS STILL BINDING AND YOU MAY NOT BE ALLOWED TO RESILE FROM IT

July 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice William Davis in Cavell -v- Transport for London [2015] EWCA 2283 (QB) has some important observations in relation to admissions and attempts to resile from admissions. “It cannot be in those interests to permit the…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 3: THE COURT OF APPEAL AND ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the third case today about the issue of costs and the conduct of proceedings. It is the most  complex, Smith & Nephew plc -v- ConvaTec Technologies Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 803. THE CASE The Court of Appeal allowed…

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST "EXPERT WITNESSES" ARE NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of the Divisional Court in Accident Exchange Ltd -v- Nathan John George-Broom & Ors [2015] EWHC 2205 (Admin) is certainly a development in the practice relating to dismissal. THE CASE The claimants applied to commit a number of…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 2: LOSER PAYS ALL APPLIES: MOORE IS NOT LESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In The London Borough of Tower Hamlets -v- The London Borough of Bromley [2015] EWHC 2271 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris refused an application for an issue based order and made an order for costs under the general rule that the…

COSTS & CONDUCT 1: MULTIPLE PARTIES, "BULLOCK" AND "SANDERSON" ORDERS AND INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE DEFENDANTS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are several cases today where the courts have considered the issue of where costs should fall and how judicial discretion should be exercised.  The first we consider is Asghar -v- Ahmad [2015] EWHC 2234 (QB) a decision of Mr…

THE PRIMACY OF ORAL TESTIMONY: ABSENT WITNESSES ORDERED TO ATTEND AND LATE AMENDMENTS REFUSED: ALL IN ONE CASE

July 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is an interesting report of two separate decisions of Mr Justice Peter Smith in Harb -v- HRH Price Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz [2015] EWHC 2195 (Ch). This relates to two decisions made on the first day…

IF YOU ENTER INTO A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT WITH YOUR CLIENT ARE YOU PLAYING RUSSIAN ROULETTE?

July 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Campbell in Addleshaw Goddard LLP  -v- Wood & Hellard [2015] EWHC B12 (Costs) has some interesting observations on contentious business agreements and the nature of litigation financing generally. THE CASE The claimant solicitors had entered into…

NEW RULES RELATING TO "NEUTRAL EVALUATION" ; LITIGANTS IN PERSON; ASSESSMENT; SPECIALIST FINANCIAL LIST (AND MORE…)

July 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

New rules have been introduced which (for the most part) come into force on the 1st October 2015.  Here we look at the key changes. THE RULES The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.4) Rules 2014 were laid before Parliament on the…

POST MITCHELL PRE-DENTON RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL: MITCHELL PRINCIPLES WERE NOT HERE TO STAY

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The appeal in Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd -v- Sinclair [2015] EWCA Civ 774 involves the Court of Appeal considering the Mitchell/Denton divide. KEY POINTS The Court overturned a decision, made post-Mitchell but prior to Denton, where a judge refused…

THINKING OF ALLEGING OR PLEADING FRAUD: BETTER READ THIS FIRST

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In NGM Sustainable Developments Ltd -v- Wallis [2015] EWHC 2089 (Ch) Mr Justice Peter Smith highlighted the importance of full and accurate pleading of a case alleging fraud. “…in commercial matters the parties and their lawyers tend to work long…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS NOT SENT TO COVENTRY: KEY POINTS AND LINKS

July 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The decision in Coventry -v- Lawrence [2015] UKSC 50 has not led to any major change in practice and procedure (in relation to a costs regime that had already ended anyway). A link to the judgment is here  KEY POINTS…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM – FURTHER PROBLEMS: YOU CANNOT ALWAYS RELY ON WHAT YOU ARE TOLD

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

Service of the claim form is an issue that continues to cause problems.  There is a brief report on Lawtel today of the decision of Stewart J in Dzekova -v- Thomas Eggar PPL (QBD 17/07/2015)*.  It is another example of…

ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: A MATTER OF RISKS AND REWARDS

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In The Queen on the application of British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authorts -v- the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2015] EWHC 2401 (Admin) Mr Justice Green made an issue based costs order. THE CASE The…

SETTING ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE IN A QOCS CASE: TWO INTERESTING DECISIONS

July 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, QOCS

I am grateful to Rebecca Jones of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me details of an important decision in relation to setting aside a notice of discontinuance served by a claimant in a costs case. The note of the judgment below…

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: COMMENTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: THE SIGNATORY CANNOT HIDE BEHIND THE DRAFTSMAN

July 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The signing of a statement of truth is now an everyday event in litigation. With documents signed by clients, or by lawyers on behalf of their clients. Recent cases highlight the significance of the statement of truth. It is important…

SOLICITORS ARE ENTITLED TO ARGUE THEY SHOULD BE PAID AND ARE NOT LITIGANTS IN PERSON: A HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

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

In EMW Law LLP -v- Halborg [2015] EWHC 2005 (Ch) His Honour Judge Purle QC considered some important elements in relation to the ability of solicitors to recover their costs. The judge also found that solicitors are not “litigants in person”…

EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONSENT ORDER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

July 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Safin (Fursecroft) Limited -v- The Estate of Dr Said Ahmed Said Badrig (deceased) [2015] EWCA Civ 739 the Court of Appeal considered the principles relating to extensions of time of a consent order. KEY POINTS The Court has the…

MAKING A FINDING OF FRAUD WITHOUT EVIDENCE 3: THE COURTS ARE NOT EASILY AFFRONTED

July 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

For the third time in a fortnight the courts have sent out a clear message of the dangers of  judges making findings of fraud without having all the evidence to hand. THE CASE In Alpha Rocks Solicitors -v- Alade [2015]…

LITIGATION RISKS AND MITIGATION OF LOSS: "MEDIATION IS A JUDGMENT CALL": WHEN IS A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE REASONABLE?

July 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

The issue of whether a failure to mediate represented a failure to mitigate loss was considered by Judge Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Orientfield Holdings Ltd -v- Bird & Bird [2015] EWHC 1963 (Ch). “Having embarked…

JUDGES AND WITNESSES 4: THE LITIGANT IN PERSON AND THE ABSENT WITNESS

July 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Otou -v- Brierley [2015] EWHC 1938 (Ch) Edward Murray (sitting as s Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) was in an unusual situation. A witness statement drafted by a litigant in person contrasted to a witness statement by a…

JUDGES AND WITNESSES 3: "UNCHALLENGED" EVIDENCE AND CREDIBILITY

July 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Various Claimants -v- Giambrone [2015] EWHC 1946 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett looked at issues relating to the credibility of witnesses where it was alleged that their evidence had not been “challenged” in certain respects. “…the days of the “I…

JUDGES AND WITNESSES 2: POISE AND POLISH IS FAR FROM CONCLUSIVE

July 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This is the second post today on the issue of how judges assess witnesses. In Mudroglu -v- Reddish LLP [2015] EWHC 1044 (Ch) His Honour Judge Keyser QC had to consider issues relating to the credibility of two witnesses. THE…

THE NEW UNINSURED DRIVERS' MIB AGREEMENT: COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1st AUGUST 2015

July 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

For those with Motor Insurers Bureau claims a new Uninsured Driver Drivers agreement comes into force on the 1st August 2015.  Here we look at the major changes. THE KEY POINT The rules are now much simpler. The key points…

COSTS: INDEMNITY COSTS; IMMEDIATE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS; SET OFF & POTENTIAL INSOLVENCY: A HIGH COURT DECISION

July 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA -v- ITG [2015] EWHC 1924 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered issues relating to indemnity costs and whether assessment of costs ordered on an interlocutory hearing should take place forthwith. KEY POINTS Although the conduct…

ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: IS IT VALID? A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION

July 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The question of whether a witness statement can be signed electronically is often described as an “open” issue. It was considered by District Judge Jenkinson in Fitzpatrick -v- AIG Europe Ltd (Liverpool County Court 1st July 2015*). THE CASE The…

THE PROFOUND LACK OF WISDOM IN SIGNING STATEMENTS OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF YOUR CLIENT

THE PROFOUND LACK OF WISDOM IN SIGNING STATEMENTS OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF YOUR CLIENT

July 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The observations of the Administrative Court in MRH Solicitors -v- The County Court sitting at Manchester [2015] EWHC 1795 (Admin) were considered in an earlier post.  However there is one further aspect of the case that justifies examination. A CAVEAT…

THE LIMITS OF ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: COMMERCIAL LITIGATION IS ABOUT MONEY (WHO KNEW?)

THE LIMITS OF ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: COMMERCIAL LITIGATION IS ABOUT MONEY (WHO KNEW?)

June 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In The Northampton Regional Livestock Centre Company Ltd -v- Cowling [2015] EWCA Civ 651 the Court of Appeal made some important observations about costs, issue based orders and success, particularly in commercial cases. THE CASE The Court of Appeal were…

EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVING PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: AN APPLICATION AHEAD OF TIME SAVES THE DAY

June 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents, Statements of Case

In Lachaux -v- Independent Print Ltd [2015] EWHC 1847 (QB) Mr Justice Nicol considered the question of whether the court has power to prospectively order  an extension of time for service of the particulars of claim. He also considered the…

MAKING FINDINGS OF FRAUD WITHOUT A PARTY BEING REPRESENTED 2: A HEARING IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

June 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In MRH Solicitors -v- The County Court sitting at Manchester [2015] EWHC 1795 (Admin) the Administrative Court, in essence, overturned findings of fraud against solicitors who had not been notified of the allegations and not given any opportunity to respond….

IF FINDINGS OF DISHONESTY ARE TO BE MADE THEN WITNESSES HAVE TO BE HEARD

June 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Two cases in two days have shown the difficulties that arise when findings of dishonesty are made by judges without hearing evidence. Here we look at the difficulties that arose when a judge held a trial without hearing evidence and…

PREVIOUS COSTS ORDERS STAND EVEN AFTER DISCONTINUANCE: A HIGH COURT DECISION

June 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Company -v- Al Refai [2015] EWHC 1793 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Smith considered whether discontinuance of an action should have an effect on previous costs orders. THE CASE The claimants had agreed terms of…

INCREASED COSTS AND "MYSTIFYING" PLEADINGS: A WARNING TO THOSE DRAFTING DEFENCES: IT'S GOING TO COST YOU

June 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Edis in Davies -v- Forrett [2015] EWHC 1761 QB is an object lesson on the dangers of lax pleading. Denying the relevance of a conviction in a pleading led to the joinder of a number…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED FOLLOWING INADEQUATE E-DISCLOSURE:

June 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The case of Smailes -v- McNally [2015] EWHC 1755 (Ch) has appeared in the reports before.  In his judgment today His Honour Judge Pelling QC refused relief from sanctions after the claimant had failed to give adequate disclosure in compliance…

TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS INCURRED BEFORE ADOPTION OF PROCEEDINGS: SUPREME COURT DECISION TODAY

June 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In a short judgment today in BPE Solicitors -v- Gabriel [2015] UKSC 39 the Supreme Court considered the question of whether a Trustee in Bankruptcy who adopts proceedings thereby becomes liable for the previous costs incurred in that action. THE…

IF YOU CAN'T PROVE IT YOU DON'T GET IT: CALLING EVIDENCE AT COURT TO PROVE A LOSS: A WORKING EXAMPLE

June 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

A party claiming damages must bring evidence to court to prove the losses it claims.  This is a simple statement. However adducing evidence which actually proves the losses claimed often gives rise to difficulties in all spheres of litigation.  The…

SETTING ASIDE AN EARLIER ORDER: A WIDE AND UNFETTERED DISCRETION?

June 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Judgment, Members Content

In Cole -v- Howlett [2015] EWHC 1697 (Ch) Mr Justice Peter Smith conducted detailed consideration of the power, and discretion, to review and set aside orders already made.  The judge agreed to set aside his earlier order striking out the…

OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE CASE THAT MAY HAVE SPARKED OFF THE JACKSON REFORMS: Multiplex -v- Cleveland Bridge

June 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Experts, Members Content

Whilst doing some work on the problems caused when lay witnesses attempt to give expert evidence I came across the case of  Multiplex Constructions (UK) LImited -v- Cleveland Bridge UK Limited [2008] EWHC 2220(TCC). It makes interesting reading for a…

COSTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND CONDUCT WHEN CONSIDERING COSTS FOLLOWING AN ORDER FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION AT AN INTERLOCUTORY STAGE

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

In JSC Mezhdumarodiniy Promyshlenniy Bank -v- Pugachev [2015] EWHC 1694 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard considered the issue of whether a respondent to an order for cross-examination should be ordered to pay the costs of that application and whether those costs…

DENTON IN THE CONTEXT OF JUDICIAL REVIEW: PUBLIC INTEREST A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT CONSIDERATION

June 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In The Queen (on the application of Charith Missaka Wijesinghe) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1558(Admin) HH Judge Deborah Taylor (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the Denton principles in relation to an…

THE MEETING OF EXPERTS: CASE LAW AND GUIDANCE

June 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Members Content

The case of Cintas Corp No 2 -v- Rhino Developments (2015 Ch D Newey J 10/6/2015) * reported on Lawtel today provides an interesting scenario in relation to the conduct of an expert and joint meetings. There is relatively little…

HOW TO GET SUED, MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE (2015 EDITION): LEEDS 30th JUNE 2015

June 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content

If you are a litigator and feeling happy, confident and have no concerns at all about getting things wrong, being sued or making a loss, then something may be missing from your life. TO MAKE YOUR LIFE COMPLETE Come to…

ANOTHER MIS-SERVED CLAIM FORM: CLAIMANTS DO NOT PASS GO AND DO NOT GET TO THE BANK

June 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

There are a number of issues considered by Mr Justice Arnold in Chopra -v- Bank of Singapore [2015] EWHC 1549 (Ch).  However the claimants failed at the very first, and very familiar, hurdle – service of the claim form. THE…

← Previous 1 … 47 48 49 … 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.