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 50

TROUBLESOME BUNDLES YET AGAIN: MR JUSTICE EDER SPEAKS OUT ON WASTEFUL BUNDLES IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT

March 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The question of bundles was raised by Mr Justice Eder in Taberna Europe -v- Selskabet [2015] EWHC 871 (Comm).  This is hardly a new complaint and appears across the board in all jurisdictions. (There are now 16 posts on this…

SOMETHING FOR THE WEEKEND: THE SOLICITOR WHO TOOK ON SALFORD OVER COURT FEES AND WON

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

I may make a habit of blogging cheerful(ish) stuff on a Friday*. This weeks its hats of to Dominic Cooper of IE Legal Solicitors who was sent me details of his run in, and success, with Salford. THE DISPUTE Like…

COSTS NOT RECOVERED WHEN DEFENDANT NOT NAMED IN CFA: SENIOR COSTS OFFICE DECISION

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

The GWS website has a link to a decision of a decision of Deputy Master Friston made in the Senior Court Costs Office in Hailey -v- Assurance Mutuelle Des Motards (CCD 1405291). It relates to the question whether costs can…

ITS NOT WHAT THE JUDGE SAID BUT THE WAY THAT THEY SAID IT: DISCUSSIONS FROM DOWN UNDER

March 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Supreme Court of South Australia made some interesting observations about the interaction between the bench and the bar in Stone -v- Moore [2015] SASC 46 (24th March 2015). In particular what does the appellate court do when a complaint…

LITIGATE IN HASTE AND YOU WON'T NECESSARILY BE ALLOWED TO AMEND AT LEISURE: SU-LING -v- GOLMAN SACHS INTERNATIONAL

March 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Second set of proceedings, Statements of Case

In the judgment today in  Quah Su-Ling -v- Goldman Sachs International [2015] EWHC Mrs Justice Carr DBE refused a claimant permission to amend her particulars of claim at a late stage. The judgment contains a succinct review of the law…

FOOTBALL, SEX, INJUNCTIONS AND MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE: BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET ON THE JUDGE'S OFFSIDE

March 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In YXB -v- TNO Mr Justice Warby set out the importance of full and frank disclosure on parties making an application for an ex-parte injunction.  It also reiterates the importance of claimants giving direct evidence whenever possible and the dangers…

SOLICITOR FOUND TO HAVE DELIBERATELY MISLED THE COURT: BOREH -v- DJIBOUTI

March 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

In Boreh -v- Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux made a clear and unequivocal finding that a solicitor had deliberately misled the court. This led to the setting aside of the injunction that the clients had…

"WALKING THE LINE": THE SRA ON BALANCING THE DUTIES OF LITIGATORS IN LITIGATION: A POTTED SUMMARY

March 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Risks of litigation

For reasons that may become evident in later posts this is an apposite day to consider the duties owed by litigators. The SRA have produced “Walking the line” a consideration of the ethical duties owed by litigators. A BRIEF SUMMARY…

DOES THE COURT OF APPEAL NEED TO "SHOW ITS WORKINGS"? ALL KICKING OFF IN THE COURT OF PROTECTION

March 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

An interesting point of procedure arose in the decision of Mr Justice Mostyn in Rochdale Metropolitan Council -v- KW [2015] EWCOP 13.  Is a Court of Appeal decision valid when it is allowed by consent and there is no reasoned…

IS SERVICE OF AN UNSEALED CLAIM FORM GOOD SERVICE? NOW THAT'S A QUESTION

March 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Heron Bros Ltd -v- Central Bedfordshire Council [2015] EWHC 604 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart considered the question of whether service of an unsealed claim form is good service. In most cases the answer is probably “no”. However the judge…

PLEADINGS SHOULD CONTAIN FACTS NOT ARGUMENT OR RHETORIC

March 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

There have been a surprising number of occasions recently where judges have had to draw attention to the basic principles of pleadings. Pleading are for facts, nor argument or “rhetoric”.  Another example can be seen in the judgment of Sir…

STATUTORY APPEALS: "EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES" AND APPEALING OUT OF TIME: WITH IMPORTANT POINTS ON THE REMISSION OF COURT FEES

March 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In The Nursing and Midwifery Council -v- Daniels [2015] EWCA Civ 225 the Court of Appeal emphasised the need for exceptional circumstances to exist when a party is seeking an extension of time to a statutory time period for appealing….

WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: APPLYING AHEAD OF TIME AVOIDS DENTON PRINCIPLES

March 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

In Peak Hotels & Resorts Ltd -v- Tarek Investments* (Ch D 12/03/15) Hildyard J made an order extending time for providing security for costs.  The case highlights (a) the importance of applying before the date for compliance has expired and…

A VERY NUANCED APPROACH TO COSTS AFTER "SUCCESS" AT TRIAL: REDSTONE -v- B LEGAL CONSIDERED

March 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Redstone -v- B Legal [2015] EWHC 745 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris made an order for costs in an action where four test cases had been heard.  There had been a trial of a preliminary issue in relation to liability….

LATE SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: EXTENSION REFUSED: REMINDER TO SERVE PROMPTLY AND PROPERLY

March 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Useful links

The case of Bellcrown Associates Ltd -v- Royal Bank of Scotland (QBC) 17/03/2015 is reported on Lawtel today*. It provides another example of the dangers of not serving a claim form properly. THE CASE The claimant was bringing an action…

ASSESSING THE EVIDENCE ON A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION: CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE RAW MATERIAL IS NECESSARY

March 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Calland -v- Financial Conduct Authority [2015] EWCA Civ 192 the Court of Appeal set out important principles to be considered when the court is considering an application for summary judgment. THE CASE The claimant brought an action under the…

PLEADINGS, EVIDENCE & PUTTING THE CLAIMANT TO PROOF: AHMED -v- LALIK & THE CO-OP

March 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Liability, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Ahmed -v- Lalik & Co-operative Insurance Society Limited [2015] EWCA 651 (QB) Mr Justice Cranston considered some important issues in relation to pleading, evidence and procedure in a case where a defendant insurer has suspicions about the nature of…

INTEREST ON COSTS; PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS & INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST FUNDERS: EXCALIBUR IN THE REPORTS AGAIN

March 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We have looked at the Excalibur case before in the context of an order for indemnity costs against funders. Further decisions in relation to costs were made by Christopher Clarke L.J. in Excalibur Ventures LLC -v- Texas Keystone INC [2015]…

IT IS NOT THAT EASY TO WITHDRAW AN ADMISSION: McWILLIAM -v- NORTON FINANCE

March 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In McWilliam -v- Norton Finance [2015] EWCA Civ 186 the Court of Appeal made some important observations in relation to admissions and the withdrawal of admissions. THE CASE The claimant was suing the defendant for secret commissions. The defendant argued…

A WITNESS STATEMENT FROM SOMEONE WITHOUT CAPACITY CAN STILL BE ADMITTED AS EVIDENCE : WITNESS EVIDENCE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

March 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The case of Milroy -v- British Telecommunications PLC [2015] EWHC 532 (QB) is an important decision in terms of the analysis of the employer’s duty to provide training. However it also contains some interesting observations from Mr Justice William Davis…

MITIGATING THE IMPACT OF THE COURT FEE INCREASE 3: ONLY CLAIM WHAT ITS WORTH AND WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO GET

March 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Damages, Members Content

This is the third in the series on mitigating the effect of court fees.  The new fees regime makes clear the need for as much accuracy as possible in assessing what the likely award is going to be.  An additional…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE

March 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Sloutsker -v- Romanova [2015] EWHC 545 (QB) Warby J granted the claimant relief from sanctions after it failed to serve witness statements in time. THE CASE The claimants brought an action for libel. The defendant applied for orders setting…

THERE ARE NOW UNEXPLODED GRENADES IN YOUR FILING CABINET: SERVE PROCEEDINGS PROMPTLY AND PROPERLY

THERE ARE NOW UNEXPLODED GRENADES IN YOUR FILING CABINET: SERVE PROCEEDINGS PROMPTLY AND PROPERLY

March 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Statements of Case

One problem with the flurry of issuing proceedings last week is that there will now be numerous actions that have been issued which are not fully ready and where service will be delayed. Remember that un-served proceedings means that there…

IF YOU WANT A STAY PENDING APPEAL MAKE FULL AND TOTAL DISCLOSURE

March 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Goldsmith -v- O’Brien [2015] EWHC 510 (Ch) Judge Purle QC refused an application for a stay pending appeal. The case is an important reminder of the burden on a party seeking a stay pending appeal. THE CASE The claimant…

LITIGATION IS "VERY MUCH AN OPTIONAL ACTIVITY": HOW WOULD THE MO(I)J RESPOND TO "NON-OPTIONAL" LITIGANTS?

March 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There is no greater sign of the MO(i)J’s lack of understanding of the reality of litigation than the statement, made in the House of Lords by Lord Faulks, that “litigation is very much an optional activity”.  TELL THAT TO BUSINESSES…

WHEN BUNDLES & SANCTIONS COLLIDE: DAVIS -v- RAJA: FAILURE TO FILE APPEAL BUNDLE LEADS TO APPEAL BEING STRUCK OUT

March 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Davis Solicitors LLP -v- Raja [2015] EWHC 519 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone refused the claimant relief from sanctions following a failure to comply with directions on appeal in relation to the filing of a bundle. There are important practical…

JUST A BIT MORE ON COURT FEES…

March 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Given the importance of the next few hours I will keep this short. 1. Lexis Nexis Blog have an interview with Keith Etherington on “Beating the fee hike – by 4pm” 2. The Guardian reports Claimants expected to rush to…

MITIGATING THE IMPACT OF THE COURT FEE INCREASE 2: FEE REMISSION – EVERY LITIGATOR HAS TO KNOW THIS NOW

March 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This is the second in the series of posts on mitigating the impact of the court fee increase. Not for the first time Kerry Underwood has got to this point already. I am not going to repeat anything Kerry says…

PETITION ABOUT THE INCREASE IN COURT FEES

March 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There is a petition to the Ministry of Justice which can be signed on-line. WHY SIGN THE PETITION? Regular readers of this blog will know the importance. This is summarised in the petition document itself “WHY IS THIS PETITION IMPORTANT?…

FIVE MORE IMPORTANT POINTS FOR THOSE ISSUING IN HASTE

March 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Friday is ( or may be)  effectively the last day you can issue under the old fee regime.  This is going to be a busy day for many litigators. Here are five points in an attempt to ensure that no…

FOUR IMPORTANT POINTS FOR THOSE HASTILY ISSUING PROCEEDINGS THIS WEEK

March 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Twitter and other sources have been full of stories of solicitors issuing numerous proceedings to avoid the (wholly ridiculous) price hike next week.  There are a few things that should be borne in mind by all those who have issued…

MORE ON THE ADVERSE IMPACT OF COURT FEE INCREASE: BLAME THE MO(i)J IF THE ECONOMY COLLAPSES

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

The impact of the court fee rise has reached the Global Legal Post with the headline that UK litigation specialist fear backlash against London over proposed court fee hike.  However it is likely to have a major impact on SMEs…

YET MORE ON COURT FEES: SME'S AND "SECOND WAVE" OF PROPOSED INCREASES

March 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Useful links

There are more interesting posts on the impact of the new court fees regime. I propose to post on this issue regularly. If anyone has any comments, views or links please let me know. The SI itself (with the new…

MITIGATING THE IMPACT OF THE COURT FEES INCREASE 1: LIMITATION STANDSTILL AGREEMENTS

March 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Limitation, Members Content, Useful links

The general view of the court fee increases is well known.  The increases are based on inadequate research and will have a major detrimental effect on the economy as well as the interests of justice.  Since the increases are likely…

COURT FEES: IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENTS: IMPLEMENTATION DATE THE 9th MARCH

March 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The Law Society Gazette reports that the implementation date for the revised Court Fees is likely to be the 9th March.  It is interesting to look at recent developments and responses. OTHER DEVELOPMENTS Compare and contrast “Justice minister Shailesh Vara…

MORE ON INDEMNITY COSTS AND THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AT TRIAL: INTERCITY TELECOMS -v- SOLANKI

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

NOTE THAT THIS JUDGMENT HAS BEEN OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL, SEE THE POST HERE  In Intercity Telecom -v- Solanki [2015] Judge Simon Brown QC awarded indemnity costs and assessed costs at the end of a trial. It is…

THE LADD -v- MARSHALL TEST: WHAT IS MEANT BY "REASONABLE DILIGENCE": A TALE OF COMPUTERS IN COURT

February 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

An appeal court will only consider new evidence on very limited grounds. The test in Ladd -v- Marshall [1954] 1 WLR 1489 is that the applicant can show that the evidence could not with reasonable diligence have been obtained for…

Y0UR OPPONENT'S WITNESS STATEMENT CANNOT BE DISCLOSED UNTIL AFTER IT IS USED AT A HEARING IN PUBLIC: A USEFUL REMINDER

February 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Barry -v- Butler [2015] EWHC 447 (QB) contains some important reminders about witness statements. The witness statements received from an opposing party cannot be disclosed generally until they are used at a hearing…

NO RE-ALLOCATION AT THE COURT OF APPEAL STAGE JUST TO GET COSTS: CONLON -v- ROYAL SUN INSURANCE PLC

February 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Conlon -v- Royal Sun Insurance plc [2015] EWCA Civ 92 the Court of Appeal refused to re-allocate a costs at the appeal stage when the application was made solely for the purpose of attempting to recover costs. THE ISSUES…

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT. DELAY AND THE DENTON CRITERIA: ANOTHER IMPORTANT CASE

February 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Avanesov -v- Shymkentpivo [2015] EWHC 394 (Comm) Mr Justice Popplewell considered the issue of setting aside judgment after a long period of delay by the defendant and the relevance of the Denton criteria. THE CASE The defendant applied to…

MORE ON BUNDLES: THERE IS MUCH TIME & MONEY TO BE SAVED YET

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Written advocacy

I have often commented (and been surprised) by the fact that a post on preparing trial bundles is always the most popular page on this blog.  Following a prompt from Dominic Regan it was interesting to watch the live feed…

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT NOT RECOVERING ALL OF ITS COSTS (AND OF THE ADVANTAGES OF A PART 36 OFFER)

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In Altus Group (UK) Limited -v- Baker Tilly [2015] EWHC 411 (Ch) HH Judge Keyser QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) made various orders in relation to the Defendant’s costs.  The Defendant did not recover all their costs of…

UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST GRANT OF RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: HOME GROUP LIMITED -v- MATREJEK

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Written advocacy

There may be a few appeals pending where a party is arguing that relief from sanctions should be granted on the grounds of the Denton criteria which “modified” the Mitchell test.  The unusual aspect of the decision in Home Group…

DECIDING CASES ON PAPER: WOODLANDS, EVIDENCE & DECIDING CASES "ONLINE"

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The decision in Woodland -v- Maxwell looked at in an earlier blog is interesting because it is one of the rare cases where the Court of Appeal carried out a (brief) analysis of the evidence in the case more than…

THE PROPOSED COURT FEE INCREASE: ACTION BY THE LAW SOCIETY – READ THE STATISTICS ABOUT ACCESS TO JUSTICE

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

The Law Society has sent a pre-action protocol letter for judicial review to challenge the government’s proposed increase in court fees. “State provision for people to redress wrongs through the courts is the hallmark of a civilised society.’ THE LAW…

PLEADINGS MUST BE CONCISE – OR ELSE! TOO MANY COUNSEL SPOILING THE BROTH?

February 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

We have looked before at problems caused by over-lengthy pleadings.  In Vincent Aziz Tchenguiz -v- Grant Thornton UK LLP [2015] EWHC 405 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt provides a virtual “cut out and keep” set of warnings of the dangers of not complying…

CONSULTATION ON COURT FEES INCREASE : GET INVOLVED

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

As we all know there are proposals to increase court fees to (frankly ridiculous) amounts. It is important that everyone takes part in the consultation process.  (Some may say that the MOJ is about to make the same counter-productive mistakes…

LENGTHY BUNDLES AND INTERIM COSTS: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE TECHNOLOGY & CONSTRUCTION COURT

February 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The two judgments of Mr Justice Akenhead in the Secretary of State for the Home Environment -v- Raythean Systems Limited [2014] EWHC 4375 (TCC) and [2015] EWHC 311 (TCC) contain some familiar motifs in relation to the size of bundles,…

ANOTHER CASE WHERE INDEMNITY COSTS AWARDED – FOR PART OF THE CLAIM

February 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content

There are now several posts on this blog considering the importance of an award for costs on an indemnity basis and cases where judges have considered this issue. Another example can be found in the decision of Stephen Jourdan QC…

SHOULD A SECOND ACTION BE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS? AN ISSUE COMING TO THE COURT OF APPEAL SOON

February 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Second set of proceedings, Striking out

There is an important note in the news section of Hardwicke Chambers website.  The Court of Appeal has granted permission to appeal in a case where the judge refused to strike out a second action issued after a first action…

← Previous 1 … 49 50 51 … 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

  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYED? 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…)
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A “NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE” (APRIL 2018)

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.