Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Conduct » Page 4
WRITING TO THE JUDGE AFTER THE DRAFT JUDGMENT HAS BEEN SENT OUT: THIS IS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE FURTHER ARGUMENT

WRITING TO THE JUDGE AFTER THE DRAFT JUDGMENT HAS BEEN SENT OUT: THIS IS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO ADVANCE FURTHER ARGUMENT

June 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

There have been a large number of cases where the courts have been critical of attempt to “re-open” judgments at the stage where the draft judgment is circulated.  We see another example here. The judge reviewed the cases on this…

THE CITATION OF FALSE AUTHORITIES: THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES HAVE A DATE IN COURT ON THE 23rd MAY

THE CITATION OF FALSE AUTHORITIES: THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES HAVE A DATE IN COURT ON THE 23rd MAY

May 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

I have written several times about the remarkable decision in  Frederick Ayinde, R (on the application of) v The London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1040 (Admin) where false authorities were presented to the court.  I have also written about …

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 10: THE DUTIES ON A PARTY PLEADING ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD OR DECEIT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 10: THE DUTIES ON A PARTY PLEADING ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD OR DECEIT

May 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Statements of Case

Allegations of fraud have to be pleaded with  care.  Those pleading such assertions must have “reasonably credible material” to support them.  Here we look at a case where allegations of deceit were made.  The judge found that the allegations had…

ANOTHER (YES ANOTHER) CASE OF FAKE AUTHORITIES BEING CITED TO THE COURT: APPEAL STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

ANOTHER (YES ANOTHER) CASE OF FAKE AUTHORITIES BEING CITED TO THE COURT: APPEAL STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

May 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Unbelievably we are looking at another case where the court found that false authorities had been cited to it.  The appeal was struck out as an abuse of process.   “In my judgment, the Court needs to take decisive action…

THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT'S COSTS : A "CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT" TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

THIRD PARTY HAD FUNDED THE LITIGATION AND WAS LIABLE TO PAY THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS : A “CHILDISH AND INEFFECTUAL ATTEMPT” TO DECEIVE THE COURT DID NOT PASS MUSTER

May 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is a well known principle that a third party funder can be liable to pay the costs of an action.  However what happens when the funding agreement is dressed up as something else – a car sale for instance? …

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 102: HOW NOT TO WRITE A LEGAL LETTER (2): SOME EXAMPLES - THREATENING TO SUBJECT YOUR OPPONENT TO THE "LEGAL EQUIVALENT OF A PROCTOLOGY EXAM"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 102: HOW NOT TO WRITE A LEGAL LETTER (2): SOME EXAMPLES – THREATENING TO SUBJECT YOUR OPPONENT TO THE “LEGAL EQUIVALENT OF A PROCTOLOGY EXAM”

May 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are continuing with this back to basics series with some more examples of how not to write legal correspondence.   We are looking at an (extreme) example, some guidance from the SRA and then the principles considered in more recent cases….

COST BITES 237: "THROUGHOUT HISTORY, LAWYERS HAVE HAD A BAD REPUTATION": COMMONSENSE AND PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED IN THE FAMILY COURTS

COST BITES 237: “THROUGHOUT HISTORY, LAWYERS HAVE HAD A BAD REPUTATION”: COMMONSENSE AND PROPORTIONALITY CONSIDERED IN THE FAMILY COURTS

May 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

Why spend £13,000 to recover a remedy that will only be worth £1,500? That is the issue considered by Deputy District Judge Hodgson [Professor David Hodson OBE KC (Hons)].  An application was made late. The gain to the applicant was…

WHEN CASES RELIED UPON IN  WRITTEN ARGUMENTS WERE SIMPLY "FALSE": WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS

WHEN CASES RELIED UPON IN WRITTEN ARGUMENTS WERE SIMPLY “FALSE”: WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS

May 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

This blog celebrates its 12th anniversary next month. Civil Litigation Brief started as a column in the Solicitors Journal 35 years ago. Over that time many people have helpfully sent me and pointed me me to cases of interest. In…

THE RICS PRACTICE ALERT  ON ACTING AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR AND OTHER HIGH VOLUME CASES: OF INTEREST TO ALL EXPERTS (AND THOSE WHO INSTRUCT THEM)

THE RICS PRACTICE ALERT ON ACTING AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR AND OTHER HIGH VOLUME CASES: OF INTEREST TO ALL EXPERTS (AND THOSE WHO INSTRUCT THEM)

May 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

The RICS has produced a Practice Alert aimed specifically at those acting as expert witnesses in housing disrepair and other high volume cases.  It some ways the Alert is surprising in that it says nothing new, that is most of…

ANOTHER CASE OF SOMEONE BREACHING THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT: THE DRAFT SHOULD NOT BE HANDED OVER THE THE LAWYER'S MARKETING DEPARTMENT

ANOTHER CASE OF SOMEONE BREACHING THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT: THE DRAFT SHOULD NOT BE HANDED OVER THE THE LAWYER’S MARKETING DEPARTMENT

April 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

It is difficult to believe that  cases about  lawyers accidently breaching a judgment embargo still happen.  However the reports keep coming.  Prominent firms of solicitors, and barristers’ chambers have, over the years fallen foul of the rules. In particular a…

COST BITES 233: VARDY -v- ROONEY: SOME EXTRA TIME ON THE COSTS ISSUES: CLAIMANT'S CONDUCT DID NOT CROSS THE LINE -NO REDUCTION OF COSTS OF APPEAL

COST BITES 233: VARDY -v- ROONEY: SOME EXTRA TIME ON THE COSTS ISSUES: CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT DID NOT CROSS THE LINE -NO REDUCTION OF COSTS OF APPEAL

April 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

In Rebekah Vardy v Coleen Rooney [2025] EWHC 1027 (KB) Mr Justice Cavanagh made some further costs rulings following the dismissal of the defendant’s appeal on issues relating to costs.  Firstly he rejected the defendant’s arguments that the claimant’s costs should be…

COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL

COST BITES 228 : DEFENDANT SOLICITOR TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE CLAIMANT ISSUING PROCEEDINGS SEEKING A STATUTE BILL

April 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Franklin v Your Lawyers Ltd [2025] EWHC 984 (SCCO) Acting Senior Costs Judge Rowley dismissed a defendant solicitor’s argument that it should recover its costs after its former client had issued proceedings seeking the delivery of a statute bill. …

COST BITES 227 : THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO PAY 80% OF THE COSTS OF TWO APPLICATIONS:  DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

COST BITES 227 : THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO PAY 80% OF THE COSTS OF TWO APPLICATIONS: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

April 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to James Packer of Duncan Lewis for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mlundira -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2025] EWHC 189 (KB), a copy of which…

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: TEN KEY POINTS CONSIDERED: ACT PROMPLY, ACT PROPERLY AND DON'T TELL LIES

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: TEN KEY POINTS CONSIDERED: ACT PROMPLY, ACT PROPERLY AND DON’T TELL LIES

April 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Legal Futures carries a report of a paralegal banned from the profession because she tried to cover up a mistake by lying to the court.  This gives me a reason to reiterate points made regularly on this blog about what…

"THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK": COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN

“THE DOG ATE MY HOMEWORK”: COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED LATE: NOT DUE TO LATENESS BUT BECAUSE OF THE INADEQUATE BUDGET AND EXPLANATIONS GIVEN

April 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Stephen Herbert Hunt v Oceania Capital Reserves Limited & Ors [2025] EWHC 837 (Ch) Master Brightwell refused the second and third defendants application for relief from sanctions in a case where the costs budget was served late.  However it…

VARDY -v- ROONEY: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT HAD BEEN GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT IN COSTS ASSESSMENT FAILS TO CROSS THE LINE

VARDY -v- ROONEY: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT THAT DEFENDANT HAD BEEN GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT IN COSTS ASSESSMENT FAILS TO CROSS THE LINE

April 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In  Rebekah Vardy v Coleen Rooney [2025] EWHC 851 (KB) Mr Justice Cavanagh rejected the claimant’s arguments that the defendant’s solicitors had misconducted themselves improperly and that there should consequently be a disallowance of some of the costs claimed by the…

EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS JUST ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS: EXPERT CONCEDES THAT PARTS OF THEIR EVIDENCE WAS "APPALLING": ONE OF THE PARTIES DESCRIBED IT AS "TERRIFYING"

EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS JUST ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS: EXPERT CONCEDES THAT PARTS OF THEIR EVIDENCE WAS “APPALLING”: ONE OF THE PARTIES DESCRIBED IT AS “TERRIFYING”

April 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In LB Croydon v D (Critical Scrutiny of the Paedeatric Overview) [2024] EWFC 438 HHJ Kathryn Major (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) was severely critical of the medical evidence called by the local authority.  That part of the…

LITIGATION "WHACK-A-MOLE" - THE MOVING TARGET AND POOR PLEADINGS - IN A CASE ABOUT ALLEGEDLY POOR PLEADINGS

LITIGATION “WHACK-A-MOLE” – THE MOVING TARGET AND POOR PLEADINGS – IN A CASE ABOUT ALLEGEDLY POOR PLEADINGS

April 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Statements of Case

We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in Israel Russell v Barry Coulter [2025] EWHC 493 (KB).  This was a case alleging that the defendant barrister had pleaded a case badly.  The claim was rejected. However it is…

ANOTHER BREACH OF THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT: REMEMBER THIS IS A CONTEMPT OF COURT

ANOTHER BREACH OF THE EMBARGO ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT: REMEMBER THIS IS A CONTEMPT OF COURT

March 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

In John Sisk and Son Ltd v Capital & Centric (Rose) Ltd [2025] EWHC 594 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that a party had breached the rules relating to the embargo on a draft…

COST BITES 221: A FAILURE TO AGREE TO MEDIATE DID NOT LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S COSTS

COST BITES 221: A FAILURE TO AGREE TO MEDIATE DID NOT LEAD TO A REDUCTION IN A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS

March 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

In Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd (Re Consequential Matters) [2025] EWHC 503 (KB) Mr Justice Constable rejected the claimant’s argument that the successful defendant’s refusal to attend mediation should lead to a reduction in the defendant’s costs.  The case…

"A POINTLESS WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY": ATTEMPTS TO "REOPEN" ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT ARE HARDLY EVER FRUITFUL - AND CAN BE EXPENSIVE

“A POINTLESS WASTE OF TIME AND MONEY”: ATTEMPTS TO “REOPEN” ISSUES WHEN A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS SENT OUT ARE HARDLY EVER FRUITFUL – AND CAN BE EXPENSIVE

March 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are a number of cases on this blog where litigants have attempted to “reopen” issues when a draft judgment is sent out to the parties for editorial corrections.  We have an example in the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST FIRM OF SOLICITORS FOR FAILING TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL TO ATTEND A HEARING

February 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

In A Father v A Mother [2025] EWHC 364 (Fam) Ms H Markham KC, sitting as Deputy High Court judge, made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The solicitors had failed to take steps to ensure that…

THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE

THE NEED FOR THE UTMOST CARE WHEN SEEKING INJUNCTIONS WITH SPEED: AN ENQUIRY AS TO DAMAGES ORDERED BECAUSE OF ERRORS MADE IN THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO THE JUDGE

February 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Injunctions, Members Content

The judgment of HHJ Halliwell, sitting as a High Court Judge, in  Bootle v GHL Property Management and Development Ltd & Anor [2025] EWHC 317 (Ch) provides an object lesson on the dangers of over-hasty applications for an injunction.   It…

COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS' COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS "ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE"

COST BITES 217: CLAIMANTS TO PAY THE DEFENDANTS’ COSTS OF THE BUDGETING HEARING: THE PROPOSED BUDGET WAS “ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE LINE”

February 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Conduct, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Constable in GS Woodland Court GP 1 Ltd & Anor v RGCM Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 285 (TCC), looked in the previous post.  Because of the nature of the budget that the…

COST BITES 215: NON-COMPLIANT POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT - BUT THE COMPLIANT PARTS REMAIN.

COST BITES 215: NON-COMPLIANT POINTS OF DISPUTE STRUCK OUT – BUT THE COMPLIANT PARTS REMAIN.

February 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Members Content, Striking out

In Christodoulides v CP Christou LLP [2025] EWHC 214 (SCCO) Deputy Costs Judge Roy KC considered the appropriate approach were part of the Points of Dispute to a bill of costs were non-compliant. He held that the appropriate course of…

COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED

COST BITES 214: SHOULD THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR COSTS AGAINST A CLAIMANT WHEN THE COSTS BUDGET HAS BEEN GREATLY REDUCED? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED

February 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Zavorotnii v Malinowski [2025] EWHC 260 (KB) HHJ Karen Walden-Smith considered the arguments as to whether a major reduction in a party’s costs budget should lead to an order for costs being made, rather than an order for costs…

CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE - BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE

CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE – BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE

February 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to Professor Keith Rix for allowing me to use an article that appears in February’s Expert Healthcare Witness Matters*.  This deals with the question of whether an expert can, or should, agree to act on a conditional…

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW XV: REMEMBER JUDGES MAY BE TALKING ABOUT YOU: ADVICE FROM THE STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW XV: REMEMBER JUDGES MAY BE TALKING ABOUT YOU: ADVICE FROM THE STREETS OF SAN FRANCISCO

January 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Written advocacy

Here we look at an interview with San Francisco Superior Court Judge, Curtis Karnow.  The interview was about a book the judge had written “Litigation in Practice“, which is available in the UK.  The original interview by is Ros Todd. As…

WHEN A PARTY CITES, AND RELIES, ON CASE LAW THAT "DOES NOT EXIST" :"A MOST UNHAPPY FEATURE OF THIS CASE"

WHEN A PARTY CITES, AND RELIES, ON CASE LAW THAT “DOES NOT EXIST” :”A MOST UNHAPPY FEATURE OF THIS CASE”

January 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

There is a very unusual element to the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr in Olsen & Anor v Finansiel Stabilitet A/S [2025] EWHC 42 (KB). The appellants, litigants in person, relied on case law that apparently supported their case. That…

INSURER FAILS IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AFTER A COURT HAD EARLIER MADE FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY TO THE CRIMINAL STANDARD: MANY TROUBLING THINGS HERE

INSURER FAILS IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AFTER A COURT HAD EARLIER MADE FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY TO THE CRIMINAL STANDARD: MANY TROUBLING THINGS HERE

January 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Aviva Insurance Ltd v Nadeem & Anor [2024] EWHC 3445 (KB) HHJ Tindal (sitting as  Judge of the High Court) dismissed an action for committal against someone who had been found to be fundamentally dishonest at a personal injury…

COST BITES 212: ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEDUCTIONS OF COSTS FROM CLIENT'S DAMAGES: THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015 AND THE SRA CODE OF CONDUCT

COST BITES 212: ARGUMENTS ABOUT DEDUCTIONS OF COSTS FROM CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015 AND THE SRA CODE OF CONDUCT

January 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are again returning to the judgment of Cost Judge Rowley in  Perrett v Wolferstans LLP [2025] EWHC 68 (SCCO).  Here we examine the claimant’s (former client’s) arguments in relation to the deduction of costs breaching the Consumer Rights Act 2015…

EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT WHICH LED TO SOLICITOR'S UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM A PROTECT PARTY'S DAMAGES: JUDGMENT FROM THE SCCO

EXTRAORDINARY CONDUCT WHICH LED TO SOLICITOR’S UNLAWFUL DEDUCTION FROM A PROTECT PARTY’S DAMAGES: JUDGMENT FROM THE SCCO

January 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

In  AKS v National Farmers Union Mutual Insurance Society Ltd [2025] EWHC 126 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard recounted an extraordinary set of facts where a solicitor had wrongly deducted sums from their client’s damages.  The judgment shows that this issue…

ADVOCACY - THE JUDGE'S VIEW XIV: "RAMBO TACTICS" DO NOT WORK (NEITHER DO THREATENING YOUR OPPONENT WITH A PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION OR MAKING FACES AT THE JUDGE...)

ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW XIV: “RAMBO TACTICS” DO NOT WORK (NEITHER DO THREATENING YOUR OPPONENT WITH A PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION OR MAKING FACES AT THE JUDGE…)

January 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Useful links

Continuing with revisiting guidance from judges in relation to advocacy. Here I advocate (hopefully in a civil way) learning from one judgment.  That is the judgment of District Judge Chin in the  extraordinary case of Revson -v- Cinque & Cinque in…

MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES II: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND: COSTS REDUCED BY 50%

MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES II: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND: COSTS REDUCED BY 50%

January 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are continuing this series looking at issues of misconduct in the assessment process by looking at the decision of District Judge Griffith in Kerins -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (Birmingham, 31st July 2015). The claimant’s costs were reduced by…

MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS - A REVIEW OF THE CASES 1:  LAHEY -v- PIRELLI TYRES LIMITED

MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT AND REDUCTIONS IN COSTS – A REVIEW OF THE CASES 1: LAHEY -v- PIRELLI TYRES LIMITED

January 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Webinar

Recent cases on the issue of costs being reduced, or disallowed, due to the conduct of the assessment proceedings have led me to review the cases on this topic. This is the first in a series of posts about the…

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW X: A RECAP OF THE POINTS SO FAR: 10 KEY POINTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW X: A RECAP OF THE POINTS SO FAR: 10 KEY POINTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD

January 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Conduct, Members Content, Useful links, Written advocacy

Carrying on with our revisiting this series we are having a short recap.  Here were look at 10 key pieces of advice arising from the series so far. (There are plenty more to come). 1. ADVICE FROM CANADA – MANNERS…

MAXIMISING INTER PARTES COSTS RECOVERY IN HOUSING LAW CASES: WEBINAR 10th JANUARY 2025

MAXIMISING INTER PARTES COSTS RECOVERY IN HOUSING LAW CASES: WEBINAR 10th JANUARY 2025

January 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Webinar

I am speaking about costs for housing lawyers on the 10th January 2025 in a webinar arranged by Steve Cornforth.  Booking details can be found by emailing Steve on stevecornforthconsultancy@gmail.com     THE WEBINAR This webinar looks at how housing…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: REASONS TO BE WARY OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES (2): A SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL DECISION

WITNESS STATEMENTS: REASONS TO BE WARY OF ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES (2): A SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL DECISION

December 30, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

We are returning to the issue of the difficulties that can be caused by the use of electronic signatures on witness statements. The dangers involved can be seen clearly in the decision of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in SRA -v-…

"PROFESSIONALISM DEMANDS THAT LAWYERS PICK THEIR BATTLES WISELY": JUDGE GRANTS EXTENSION AND ORDERS THE LAWYERS TO GO TO LUNCH TOGETHER...

“PROFESSIONALISM DEMANDS THAT LAWYERS PICK THEIR BATTLES WISELY”: JUDGE GRANTS EXTENSION AND ORDERS THE LAWYERS TO GO TO LUNCH TOGETHER…

December 16, 2024 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Extensions of time, Members Content

Coming to the end of the year, and with Christmas nearly upon us, all lawyers  could benefit from reading the judgment of Chief U.S. District Judge David Proctor in McCullers v. Koch Foods of Ala., LLC in 2024 WL 4907226…

PROVING THINGS 251: TRIAL JUDGE FINDS THAT DEFENDANT'S LETTER WAS NOT WRITTEN CONTEMPORANEOUSLY AND CONCOCTED IN AN ATTEMPT TO EXCULPATE

PROVING THINGS 251: TRIAL JUDGE FINDS THAT DEFENDANT’S LETTER WAS NOT WRITTEN CONTEMPORANEOUSLY AND CONCOCTED IN AN ATTEMPT TO EXCULPATE

November 27, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHJ Berkley in Melia & Anor v Tamlyn And Son ltd [2024] EWHC 3002 (Ch) has a number of interesting aspects in relation to the assessment of evidence.  One of those things is the judge’s rejection of…

COST BITES 196: COSTS IN A FAMILY CASE: “EVERY POUND THEY SPEND FIGHTING EACH OTHER IS A POUND THAT WILL NOT BE AVAILABLE FOR THEM AND THEIR CHILDREN”

November 25, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Contribution proceedings, Costs, Members Content

In LI v FT (Maintenance Pending Suit: Costs) [2024] EWFC 342 Deputy District Judge Harrop made some important remarks in relation to the amount spent in bringing, and defending, an application for maintenance spending suit. “I am dismayed by what…

COST BITES 194: CLAIMANT WHO SUCCEEDED ON SOME, BUT NOT ALL, ISSUES AWARDED COSTS ON THE STANDARD BASIS

COST BITES 194: CLAIMANT WHO SUCCEEDED ON SOME, BUT NOT ALL, ISSUES AWARDED COSTS ON THE STANDARD BASIS

November 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Personal Injury

In FXS v The Mulberry Bush Organisation Ltd [2024] EWHC 2844 (KB) Margaret Obi, sitting as a High Court Judge, considered issues of costs where a claimant had not succeeded in establishing negligence at trial but was successful on other…

COST BITES 191: COSTS BILL REDUCED TO NIL BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: "THIS IS THE WORSE EXAMPLE OF TAMPERING WITH A FILE OF PAPERS THAT I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED"

COST BITES 191: COSTS BILL REDUCED TO NIL BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT: “THIS IS THE WORSE EXAMPLE OF TAMPERING WITH A FILE OF PAPERS THAT I HAVE EVER ENCOUNTERED”

November 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Simon Gibbs of GWS Costs for sending me a copy of the judgment of Costs Judge James in Kapoor -v- Johal [2024] EWHC 2853 (SCCO).  The judge made findings of serious misconduct by the receiving party…

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW 5: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE: TO THE JUDGE YOUR CASE IS A PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW 5: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE: TO THE JUDGE YOUR CASE IS A PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED

November 1, 2024 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Conduct, Members Content, Written advocacy

This series continues the recap of the views from judges around the world and the advice they give to advocates.  Here we look at the article from J. Frederic Voros, jr for the Utah State Bar: To Persuade a Judge,…

WEBINAR ON NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS: 5th NOVEMBER 2024

October 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Webinar

My colleagues Steven Turner and Andrew Hogan are presenting a free webinar on the 5th November on Non-Party Costs Orders. Booking details are available here.    The webinar  considers the law practice and procedure relating to non-party costs orders in the context…

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW 4:  "AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS" (OH AND BEWARE OF "WELL PADDED VANITY")

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW 4: “AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS” (OH AND BEWARE OF “WELL PADDED VANITY”)

October 28, 2024 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Conduct, Members Content, Written advocacy

 Australia and looking at the guidance given by the Hon Chief Justice Pat Keane in his keynote address to the Australian Lawyers Alliance Queensland State Conference in February 2013. (At the moment I cannot find a link to the original…

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH PARTIES IF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE IS TO BE USED IN MATTERS OF CONTRACTUAL CONSTRUCTION: BEST NOT THROW THE KITCHEN SINK INTO THE MIX

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR BOTH PARTIES IF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE IS TO BE USED IN MATTERS OF CONTRACTUAL CONSTRUCTION: BEST NOT THROW THE KITCHEN SINK INTO THE MIX

October 21, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

In Workman Properties Ltd v Adi Building And Refurbishment Ltd [2024] EWHC 2627 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies sent out a clear reminder of the duties on all parties in a Part 8 case where the court was being asked to…

COST BITES 186: "MY CASE WAS SO HOPELESS I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY YOUR COSTS": NOT A WHOLLY ATTRACTIVE ARGUMENT

COST BITES 186: “MY CASE WAS SO HOPELESS I SHOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY YOUR COSTS”: NOT A WHOLLY ATTRACTIVE ARGUMENT

October 16, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Mainwaring v Bailey [2024] EWHC 2614 (Fam) Mr Justice Henke ordered an unsuccessful appellant to pay the respondent’s costs.  He rejected the appellant’s argument that his appeal was so evidently hopeless that the respondent should not have responded.   He…

A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY DOES NOT AFFECT A CLAIMANT'S RIGHT TO RECOVER PROPERTY DAMAGES

A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY DOES NOT AFFECT A CLAIMANT’S RIGHT TO RECOVER PROPERTY DAMAGES

October 15, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Senay & Anor v Mulsanne Insurance Company Ltd [2024] EWCC 12 HHJ Charman found that a finding of fundamental dishonesty in a personal injury action did not affect the claimant’s rights to recover damages for the property claim to…

COST BITES 185: VARYING THE AMOUNT PAYABLE AFTER A CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES:  THE COURT CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PRE-DISCONTINUANCE CONDUCT

COST BITES 185: VARYING THE AMOUNT PAYABLE AFTER A CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES: THE COURT CAN TAKE INTO ACCOUNT PRE-DISCONTINUANCE CONDUCT

October 14, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In her very last judgment in the case of Elphicke v Times Media Ltd [2024] EWHC 2595 (KB) Master McCloud considered the question of whether it is possible for a court to take into account pre-discontinuance conduct when considering whether…

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 12 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT

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.