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 51

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…

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…

← Previous 1 … 50 51 52 … 65 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

  • CHILDREN AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION 2026: WEBINAR 30th JUNE 2026
  • COST BITES 406: CAN A PARTY RECOVER UNNECESSARY COSTS AS DAMAGES? THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN UNNECESSARY SECOND ACTION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • THE WEBINAR ON THE SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: WHAT LITIGATION FIRMS NEED TO KNOW: TOGETHER WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS AND TEMPLATESNOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • COST BITES 405: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT LEAD TO A DEDUCTION OF 45% OF THEIR COSTS? A TOOTH DECISION…
  • SHOULD THE COURT ALLOW A “NEWLY APPOINTED” EMPLOYEE TO REPRESENT A LIMITED COMPANY AT A HEARING?

Top Posts

NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES' COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
A NEW SERIES OF USEFUL ONLINE CALCULATORS FOR LITIGATORS AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION (WITH A 20% DISCOUNT FOR CLB READERS): MAKING IT ALL ADD UP
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT: HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS: KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
COST BITES 404: JUDGE ORDERS DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: PARTIES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH THE PROCESS OF LITIGATION: "THEY SHOULD BE USING NON-COURT BASED DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHEREVER POSSIBLE"
THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS A JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION IN FAVOUR OF A SOLICITOR: THE OMBUDSMAN GOT NOTHING WRONG (QUITE A LOT HERE ABOUT VULNERABLE CLIENTS AS WELL...)

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.