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 55

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…

INVESTMENT BANK SPECIAL ADMINISTRATORS CANNOT USE CFAS: HIGH COURT DECISION

June 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

Today appears to be a day for exceptions.  An earlier post dealt with the remaining provisions whereby litigants can recover insurance premiums this post deals with the limited circumstances in which administrators can litigate and recover additional liabilities. The question…

PHONE HACKING, MISSING DOCUMENTS AND THE ABSENT WITNESS: IMPORTANT ISSUES OF CIVIL EVIDENCE

June 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The issues raised in the “phone hacking” trial are well known. However Mr Justice Mann also made some important observations about civil evidence. In particular the inferences to be drawn when witnesses are not called or evidence not available. These…

AMENDING PLEADINGS: WELL I'M JUST GOING TO ISSUE SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS – IS THAT RELEVANT?

May 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The earlier post looked at the general principles in relation to late amendment of pleadings. There was one further point considered in CIP Properties -v- Galliford Try [2015] EWHC 135 (TCC). The claimant argued that the amendments should be allowed…

AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY "LATE"?

May 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have looked at the case of CIP Properties -v- Galliford Try  twice before in the context of costs budgeting. The case came before Mr Justice Coulson again [2015] EWHC 1345 (TCC)  on the topic of amendment of pleadings.  It is…

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST RESPONDENT IN RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATION: WHAT A WASTE?

May 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a brief report on Lawtel* of the decision of Popplewell J in Viridor Waste Management Ltd -v- Veolia Es Ltd (QBD (Comm) 22/05/2015. THE CASE The claimant was bringing an action for £27 million unjust enrichment. The claim…

"TOUCH SENSITIVE" WITNESS STATEMENTS AND OTHER FORMS OF EVIDENCE: WHEN THE CLAIMANTS COLLECT THE EVIDENCE THEMSELVES

May 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The decision of Recorder Amanda Michaels (sitting as a Deputy Enterprise Judge) in Minder Music Ltd -v- Sharples [2015] EWHC 1454 (IPEC) raises some interesting issues in relation to witness statements and evidence. In particular the problems when a party…

HELL IT WAS IN "THAT FEBRILE TIME": OSTRICHES, MITCHELL, DENTON AND THE "BRILLIANT READJUSTMENT"

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

There are some interesting observations made by Lord Dyson MR in The English Experience of Access to Justice Reform. In particular the look back at the “febrile” atmosphere that Mitchell created and the rationale of the subsequent “revision” in Denton….

INCREASED INTEREST AND COSTS AFTER CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER: JUDGMENT FOR THREE TIMES MORE THAN CLAIMANT'S OFFER

May 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

In Thai Airways International Public Company Ltd -v- KI Holdings Co Ltd [2015] EWHC 1476 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggat made slight modifications to the additional amounts to be awarded to a claimant which had beaten its own part 36 offer….

DEFAULT JUDGMENT CAN BE OBTAINED WHEN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE IS SERVED LATE

May 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Judgment, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

NB THIS DECISION HAS SINCE BEEN OVERTURNED BY A CHANGE IN THE RULES, SEE THE POST HERE. A claimant can enter judgment in default of acknowledgement of service.  What is the position if the acknowledgment of service is served late….

"TAKING THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH LIGHTLY": CONTEMPT OF COURT WHEN DOCUMENTS WERE "CREATED" LONG AFTER THE EVENT

May 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In GB Holdings Ltd -v- Short [2015] EWHC 1378 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson reviewed the authorities and principles relating to applications for contempt of court when it is alleged that a witness has forged documents in relation to the action….

INDEMNITY COSTS AND REDUCED INTEREST ON DAMAGES BECAUSE OF DELAY: COURTS WILL STAY ON THE RAILS

May 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Interest, Members Content

There is a short interesting judgment by Mr Justice Akenhead  in Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd -v- Handy [2015] EWHC 1460 (TCC) which deals with the principles relating to indemnity costs and interest. A further interesting point is that the claimant…

FAILURE TO COMPLETE PRE-TRIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE FULLY LEADS TO DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM BEING STRUCK OUT

May 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Waterman Transport Ltd -v- Torchwood Properties Ltd [2015] EWHC 1446 (TCC) Mr Justice Akenhead entered judgment for a claimant and struck out a counterclaim after the defendant failed to file a completed pre-trial review questionnaire properly. THE CASE The…

I DIDN'T MEAN IT WHEN I SIGNED THE JOINT REPORT: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN EXPERTS CHANGE THEIR MINDS?

May 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt in Iraqi Civilians -v- Ministry of Defence [2015] EWHC 1254 (QB) contains some interesting passages in relation to an expert reneging from the contents of a joint report. In particular what is the appropriate…

PROOF OF FACTS: THE BASIC PRINCIPLES SUMMARISED (BORROWING FROM THE FAMILY COURTS)

May 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In a short judgment BR (Proof of Facts) [2015] EWFC 41 Mr Justice Peter Jackson provides a summary of key issues in relation to evidence. The judgment is specifically in relation fact finding in children cases. However part of the…

MORE ON "CHANGING" WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CREDIBILITY: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

May 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Liability, Members Content, Rule Changes

A post yesterday commented upon the difficulties caused when a witness produces two (sometimes contradictory) witness statements. Another example of witness evidence leading to problems at trial can be seen in the judgment of HH Judge Collender QC (sitting as…

THAT "DIFFICULT SECOND STATEMENT": IT IS HARDLY EVER GOING TO BE A HIT

May 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment in Buswell -v- Symes [2015] EWHC 1379 (QB) illustrates the dangers of “supplementary “witness statements. Real problems can occur for the party putting in the new evidence. THE CASE The claimant was seriously injured when his motorcycle was…

CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE COUNTY COURT: THE RISK OF INJUSTICE RUNNING RIFE

May 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Committal proceedings in the civil courts are a serious business. Respondents can, and often do, go to prison. The legal costs incurred by the applicant are often extremely high. However those responding have real and fundamental difficulties in obtaining representation….

LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & ENTERPRISE COURT: HANDED OVER ON A PLATE?

LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & ENTERPRISE COURT: HANDED OVER ON A PLATE?

May 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court is likely to be a model of good practice. Basically designed to ensure the SMEs can protect their intellectual property rights without going broke in the process it has a fairly robust approach to procedure…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS AWARD OF INDEMNITY COSTS: RAYMOND -v- YOUNG

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

In Raymond -v- Young [2015] EWCA Civ 456 the Court of Appeal upheld an award of indemnity costs, awarded as a result of the conduct of the defendants. THE CASE The appeal concerned the award of £155,000 for diminution in…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NOW THERE REALLY IS ONE LAW FOR THE RICH: THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR CLAIMANT LAWYERS

May 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There has been much debate about the impact of the “fundamental dishonesty” law.  One practical effect it must have, however, is to ensure that claimant lawyers consider and explain the importance of the witness statement. THE ISSUE The problem with…

WASTED COSTS HEARING: NOT JUSTIFIED BECAUSE OF LIKELY COSTS INVOLVED: CAVEAT LITIGATOR

May 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In Kagalovsky -v- Balmore Invest Limited [2015] EWEHC 1337 (QB) Mr Justice Turner turned down a wasted costs application at the first stage. “A cigarette packet carries the warning that smoking can kill you. Solicitors’ standard terms of business should…

CASE PROJECT MANAGEMENT: PRESENTATION BY H.H. JUDGE SIMON BROWN QC.

May 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Risks of litigation

Attached to this post  –  Case Project Management (1) – are the slides that HH Judge Brown used in his recent address on Case Project Management to the Association of Cost Lawyers. Reproduced with his permission. KEY POINTS The slides take…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ORDER STRIKING OUT CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO SERVE EXPERT REPORT: DON'T PARK THE LORRY WHEN THE TIDE IS AGAINST YOU

May 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Elliott -v- Stobart Group Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 449 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out an application for damages because of a failure to serve a medical report. “In my judgment Judge Platts was correct…

"FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY" A ROUND UP OF CASES & COMMENTARY

May 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Risks of litigation, Useful links

The earlier post on the procedural aspects of “fundamental” dishonesty led to the most visitors to the blog in a weekend ever.  Here we look at posts, articles, comments and cases in relation to the concept of fundamental dishonesty. REPORTED…

"FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY" AND STRIKING OUT IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: TEN KEY PROCEDURAL POINTS

May 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The rule as to “fundamental” dishonesty has attracted a lot of attraction (and a lot of heated debate). However there has been very little examination of the details of the Act and the consequent procedural implications.  There are 10 key…

ASHLEY -v- TESCO STORES: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE: CLAIMANT HAS SIX MONTHS TO SERVE ON A SCOTTISH COMPANY

May 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

The case of Ashley -v- Tesco Stores [2015] EWCA Civ 1423 has been looked at earlier in this blog. The full transcript is now available. THE JUDGMENT OF LADY JUSTICE ARDEN This appeal from the order of Patterson J dated…

PERMISSION TO APPEAL NOT NEEDED FROM JUDGE AT FIRST INSTANCE (BUT YOU SHOULD STILL ASK).

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

In P -v- P [2-15] EWCA Civ 447 the Court of Appeal held that it is not mandatory for a party who wishes to appeal to seek permission from the judge at first instance. THE CASE The Court of Appeal…

TRIAL HAD NOT "COMMENCED" : ADDITIONAL LIABILITY NOT 100%: HIGH COURT DECISION ON COSTS

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

In James -v- Ireland [2015] EWHC 1259 (QB) Mrs Justice Slade DBE overturned an earlier decision that a trial had commenced and the claimant was entitled to 100% uplift in costs. (The uplift in costs resulted in a sum of…

TRIAL BUNDLES, SEDLEY'S LAWS AND DOCUMENTARY CARPET BOMBING

May 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

“Sedley’s Laws” of trial bundles were mentioned by Mr Justice Turner in Griffiths -v- The Secretary of State for Health [2015]. Another example of over-sized trial bundles. “CPR 1.3 imposes a duty upon the parties to help the court to…

APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT MADE LATE IN THE DAY: APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL TO SET JUDGMENT ASIDE ALLOWED

May 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Priestley -v- Dunbar [2015] EWHC 987 (Ch) H.H.Judge Behrens (sitting as a judge of the High Court) overturned an earlier decision refusing to set judgment aside on the grounds of delay. THE CASE The claimant had obtained default judgment…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY AND APPEALS: A COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

May 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Curran -v- Collins [2015] EWCA Civ 404 the Court of Appeal considered how an appellate court should approach issues of witness credibility.  It is an example of a court dealing with a witness who, the judge finds, has “convinced…

AMENDING PLEADINGS LATE 1: WANI LLP -v- RBS: A MATTER OF INTEREST?

May 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

There have been a few cases recently relating to fairly last minute attempts to amend pleadings. The principles governing applications were considered by Mr Justice Henderson in Wani LLP -v- The Royal Bank of Scotland [2015] EWHC 1181 (Ch). It…

COCKELL –v- HOLTON AND MISLEADING HEADLINES: IT WASN'T THE WRONG EMAIL ADDRESS THAT KILLED THE COUNTERCLAIM

May 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents, Statements of Case

There are many reports in the legal press that deal with the relief from sanctions issue in Cockell -v- Holton (No 2) [2015] EWHC 1117 (TCC). Many of these concentrate upon the initial failure to lodge the pleading at court because…

ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION

ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION

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

In Decker -v- Hopcraft [2015] EWHC 1170(QB)Mr Justice Warby set out the principles to be considered when a litigant seeks an adjournment of a hearing on the grounds of ill health. The judge held that there were five main factors…

COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE CLIENT AFTER PROCTOR: A NEW TYPE OF LEGAL DRAFTING REQUIRING PARTICULAR SKILLS

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

In the Proctor -v- Raleys case the standard forms and letters written by the insurers came under close scrutiny at the trial and in the Court of Appeal. Professor Richard Moorhead provides an interesting angle on this issue in his…

AMENDED PLEADING FILED LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: THE NEED TO PLEAD THE CASE PROPERLY

April 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

In Cockell -v- Holton (No 2) [2015] EWHC 1117 (TCC) the defendant made a mistake in typing an e mail address so that an amended Defence and Counterclaim was served late. The application for relief from sanctions was refused.  The…

ADVISING CLIENTS PROPERLY AND THE ECONOMICS OF PRACTICE: WHEN DRAWINGS ARE AT £9.9 MILLION

April 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The earlier post on Procter -v- Raley’s solicitors contained a submission on behalf of the defendant that it was necessary “in modern conditions” for solicitors to “commoditise” their advice to clients. The Court of Appeal were doubtful on that point because there…

INTERIM PAYMENTS; SERIOUS INJURY; ACCOMMODATION AND EELES

April 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Statements of Case

The very first post on this blog was a review of the law relating to interim payments in personal injury cases after Eeles. This issue was raised against in the decision of Grainger -v- Cooper [2015] EWHC 1132 (QB). THE…

PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS DO NOT BREACH BREACH INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE AND SHOULD BE A "REASONABLE SUM"

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

In XYZ -v- Transform Medical Group (CS) Limited [2015] EWHC 1151 (QB) Mrs Justice Thirlwall DBE considered several issues in relation to payments on account of costs. THE CASE The action is a group action in which nearly 1000 women…

FAILURE TO GIVE ADEQUATE REPLIES TO PART 18 QUESTIONS LEADS TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

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

In his judgment today in Griffith -v- Gourgey [2015] EWHC 1080 (Ch) Mr Justice Simon addressed the issue of whether an action stands struck out if a party gives inadequate replies to Part 18 questions after a peremptory order has…

ANOTHER LATE WITNESS STATEMENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

April 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the decision of Judge Robinson in Buswell -v- Symes (QBD 20/04/2015) this involves another case where a witness statement was served late and permission to rely upon that statement was refused. *…

← Previous 1 … 54 55 56 … 67 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

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 88: ANOTHER CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE PLEADINGS: “THE DEFENDANTS ARE ENTITLED TO KNOW THE CASE AGAINST THEM…”
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 87: A CLAIM CAN BE STRUCK OUT ON AN ANALYSIS OF THE PLEADED CASE
  • EXPERT WATCH 64: LOOKING AT THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN EXPERT REPORTING BADLY
  • COST BITES 428 : IF THERE IS NO CHARGING CLAUSE IN THE WILL CAN THE SOLICITOR GET PAID?
  • COST BITES 427: WHEN A SOLICITOR ABANDONS AN ASSESSMENT: PERSONAL LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW

Top Posts

COST BITES 426: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK SHOULD PAY COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUING: "THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK IS DESIGNED TO BE DIFFERENT"
THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN COURT: AN INTERESTING PRACTICE DIRECTION FROM THE HIGH COURT IN IRELAND : GOOD ADVICE FOR US ALL
COST BITES 424: A CLAIM FOR 30.5 HOURS IN ONE DAY: A SCHEDULE "SO UNRELIABLE IT CANNOT FORM THE BASIS FOR ASSESSMENT"
ATTEMPTING TO RE-WRITE A DRAFT JUDGMENT: THIS HARDLY EVER (IF EVER) PERSUADES A JUDGE THAT THEY WERE WRONG

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.