Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Costs » Page 29

FIXED COSTS AND PART 36: THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal has given judgment today in Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94. “Where a claimant makes a successful Part 36 offer in a section IIIA case, he will be awarded fixed costs to the last staging…

COSTS, COPYING AND PROPORTIONALITY

February 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,, Uncategorized

The judgment of His Honour Judge Lochrane in Ryanair Limited -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWFC B5 has attracted some attention. Here I want to look at the short judgment in relation to costs. THE CASE…

WHY THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COURT FEES INCREASE SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

If evidence were needed of the profound impact of the increase in court fees in can be found in newspaper articles over the past few days. IT IS JUST ONE CASE The Guardian reported on one case of a social…

MOVING FROM LEGAL AID TO CFAS: THE JUDGMENTS

February 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB see the appeals relating to these cases discussed here The cases surrounding the switch from legal aid to a CFA were reviewed  in my post earlier this week . The full transcripts are now available (I am grateful to Aaron Vodden…

THE MEANING OF THE WORD "CLAIM": A PSYCHOLOGICAL PHENOMENON

February 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Global Flood Defence Systems -v- Johan Den Noort Beheer BV [2016] EWHC 189 (IPEC) His Honour Judge Hacon was considering an issue very specific to the Intellecutal Property Enterprise Court. However the observations are interesting and may be of…

"NEAR MISS" RULE NO LONGER APPLICABLE: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ON COSTS

February 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Sugar Hut Group Limited -v- AJ Insurance Services [2016] EWCA Civ 46 the Court of Appeal overturned an award of costs made against a successful party. “The Claimants’ recovery exceeded the Part 36 offer by a comfortable margin and…

COSTS,INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS: (OR "COPPERS COP IT")

January 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Contribution proceedings, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Mohidin -v-Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2016] EWHC 105 (QB) Mr Justice Gilbart carried out an extensive review of the principles relating to contribution proceedings and costs. KEY POINTS Two police officers who had been involved in the…

COURT FEES: LINKS FOR TODAY

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

The links section is an integral part of this blog. For today, however, I wanted to take those links on the issue of court fees and put them in a post of their own.  That is the responses today to…

LORD CHIEF JUSTICE'S REPORT 2015: CIVIL WORK

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The Lord Chief Justice’s Report 2015 covers a number of issues.  Of particular interest to civil practitioners. The Briggs Review is summarised. There is an emphasis on control of litigation costs and court fees “The Jackson review reforms have now…

ANOTHER CASE OF INDEMNITY COSTS BECAUSE OF A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE

January 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision on Master Simons in Bristow  -v- The Princess Alexander Hospital NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B22 (Costs) contains examples of two mistakes that can be made on assessment of costs. The most telling is the defendant’s failure to respond…

PART 36, THE COMPENSATION RECOVERY UNIT AND COSTS: A SIGNIFICANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Crooks -v- Hendricks Lovell Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 8 the Court of Appeal considered some significant issues in relation to the interrelationship between Part 36 and the CRU situation in personal injury cases. KEY POINTS A claimant who recovered…

TEN NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS FOR LITIGATORS IN 2016

December 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Damages, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Proportionality, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Service of the claim form, Statements of Case, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Some resolutions to keep you prosperous and out of difficulties in 2016. (Happy New Year) 1. NEVER, EVER, GUESS ABOUT A LIMITATION PERIOD (OR TAKE A CLIENT’S WORD FOR IT) Litigators of all types must have a clear idea about…

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2015: POETRY, CARPET BOMBING AND DISAPPEARING EXPERTS

December 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Members Content, QOCS, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

We civil litigators cannot be left out of the, apparently universal, need for  an annual review. The annual review last year was headed with the words “prolixity”, “sanctions” and creative writing.  Here we look at poetry, carpet bombing and disappearing…

PART 36: WHEN THE NORMAL COSTS PENALTIES MAY NOT APPLY

December 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Yentob -v-MGN Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1292 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the judge not to impose the normal penalties when a claimant failed to beat a Part 36 offer. KEY POINTS When a party fails…

CHILDREN AND SUCCESS FEES 3: APPEAL WITHDRAWN

December 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

Earlier posts looked at the decision of Regional Cost Judge Lumb in A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th August 2015). The second judgment on costs is now available on Bailli. These posts deal with deduction of…

NO SPECIAL RULES FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: COSTS DO NOT FOLLOW THE EVENT FOLLOWING UNREASONABLE CONDUCT

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Litigants in person, Members Content, Uncategorized

Master Mathews faced an unusual scenario in Jones -v- Longley [2015] EWHC 3362 (Ch).  This case highlights the fact that litigants in person are not subject to any special rules and are liable to have orders for costs made against…

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS & FAILURE TO MEDIATE: CLAIMANT BEATS OWN OFFER AND COSTS INCREASED BY 10%

December 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The claimant beat its own Part 36 offer on costs in the case of Reid -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B21. Consequently costs were increased by 10% and additional interest accrued. “If the party unwilling to mediate is…

COSTS BUDGETING, PROPORTIONALITY AND GROUP LITIGATION

December 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Group Litigation Orders, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine & others [2015] EWHC 3543 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone (sitting with Master Leslie & Chief Master Gordon Saker) considered costs budgeting within a Group Litigation Order. “Recognising that this is a complex case…

CLAIMANT CAN RECOVER COSTS AGAINST A DEFENDANT NOT NAMED IN THE CFA

December 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Engeham -v- London & Quadrant Housing Ltd & Academy of Plumbing Ltd (01/12/2015) * the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a consent order which stated that damages and costs were to be paid by a defendant not named…

IS THIS A CLAIMANT'S OR DEFENDANT'S OFFER? ANOTHER IMPORTANT HIGH COURT DECISION ON PART 36

November 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Van Orrd Uk Limited -v- Allseas UK Limited [2015] EWHC 3385 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson considered the appropriate consequences when the defendant had beaten its own Part 36 offer. These were unusual circumstances in that the  court had to…

COSTS AS DAMAGES: SOME OBITER, BUT IMPORTANT, REMARKS

November 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are some important remarks on legal costs claimed as damages in Shaw -v- Kovac [2015] EWHC 3335(QB). (A case that is considered in more detail on Fatal Accidents Law. KEY POINTS In a fatal claim the costs of attending the…

NO INDICATIONS GIVEN FROM TRIAL JUDGE IN RELATION TO EXCEEDING COSTS BUDGET: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH TO INTERIM COSTS WHERE THE COSTS HAVE EXCEEDED THE COSTS BUDGET

November 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

Can (and should) the trial judge give any indication in relation to costs budgets at the end of a trial if the costs budgets have been exceeded. Further what is the appropriate approach to an application for interim costs when…

COSTS AFTER RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT

November 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

An earlier post looked at the decision of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in North Midland Construction plc -v- Geo Networks Ltd [2015] 2384 (TCC).  Here we look at the subsequent order in relation to costs. THE CASE The claimant failed to…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS: COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS, ABSENT STATEMENTS AND LATE BUNDLES

November 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In F-v-M [2015] EWHC 3259 (Fam) Mr Justice Cobb made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The judgment is (and was designed to be) an object lesson in the need to comply with court directions and court…

COSTS WHERE CLAIMANTS ARE REPRESENTED BY MORE THAN ONE FIRM OF SOLICITORS: IT CAN GET DIFFICULT

November 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Ong -v- Ping [2015] EWHC 3258 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered the relevant order to make as to costs when the claimants in an action had been represented by separate solicitors. THE CASE Four claimants had been successful in…

COSTS WHERE A CLAIMANT ACCEPTS A PART 36 OFFER LATE: TWO CASES WHERE THE CLAIMANTS CAME TO GRIEF

November 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

When a claimant accepts a Part 36 offer late costs become at large.  Here we look at two cases where late acceptance of a Part 36 offer had grave consequences for a claimant.* “A claimant who pursues a claim in…

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…

DOES EVERY FIRM NEED A "PROPORTIONALITY" TSAR? PROPORTIONALITY AND SURVIVAL FOR LITIGATORS 3

November 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Case Management, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In January this year I started a series “Proportionality and Survival for Litigators”. I predicted it would be a lengthy series. I want to look at practical ways in which litigators can ensure that costs remain “proportional”. This, most probably,…

ANOTHER CASE WHERE THERE WAS AN INVALID PART 36 OFFER; NO RESPONSE TO OFFERS TO MEDIATE AND NEITHER PARTY RECOVERED COSTS

November 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the Court of Appeal decision in NJ Rickard Ltd -v- Holloway (CA 03/11/2015)*. It is an example of: (i)the importance of making a valid Part 36 offer; (ii)an example of the consequences…

WHAT IS MEANT BY "PROPORTIONALITY"? CONSIDERATION BY THE SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE

November 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Hobbs -v- Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B20 (Costs) Master O’Hare considered the question of proportionality in the context of a low value clinical negligence case. “In my judgment, although it was reasonable for the…

YOU'RE AS BAD AS EACH OTHER: NO-ONE IS GETTING ANY COSTS: POWERFUL WORDS IN THE HIGH COURT

November 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In GBM Minerals Engineering Consultants Limited -v- GM Minerals Holdings Limited [2015] EWHC 3091 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser had some some strong words to say about conduct and costs, resulting in a decision that no order for costs should be…

DAMNED IF YOU DO: DAMNED IF YOU DON'T: AGREEING COSTS BUDGETS AND COMPLYING WITH THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

October 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

“Are lawyers colluding on fees?”, asked Rachel Rothwell in the Law Society Gazette yesterday.  Rachel was reporting on a concern, albeit a low key one expressed by some judges that parties are “colluding” to keep their fees high in costs…

APPLICATION FOR INDEMNITY COSTS REFUSED: A HIGH COURT DECISION

October 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Harlequin Property (SVG) Limited -v- Wilkins Kennedy [2015] EWHC 3050 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson refused an application for indemnity costs and reduced the sum claimed from £51,787.50 to £35,000. THE CASE The claimant made a…

SUCCESSFUL PART 36 OFFER BY CLAIMANT ATTRACTS INDEMNITY COSTS ONLY FROM THE DATE OF EXPIRY OF THE OFFER: A HIGH COURT CASE

October 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Interest, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In RXDX -v- Northampton Borough Council [2015] EWHC 2938 (QB) Sir Colin Mackay revised an order in relation to indemnity costs following a Part 36 offer. THE CASE On the 12th March 2015 the claimant offered to settle the issue…

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….

IS THIS A PART 36 OFFER I SEE BEFORE ME? THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Justice Morgan in Tim-Alexander Gunther Nikolaus Hertel -v- Artemis International Sarl [2015] EWHC 2848 (Ch) involves a complex set of facts but is  extremely important in terms of construction of Part 36 offers. (It is perhaps…

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…

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…

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…

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…

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…

THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: A PRIMER

September 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

 In the recent post on the case of  SRA -v-Imran we saw the problems posed because the respondent had failed to file a schedule of costs. Rather than order a detailed assessment the judge’s response was to order a “nominal”…

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…

HOW THE BANKS GOT AWAY WITHOUT PAYING COURT FEES (FOR A WHILE)

September 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Master Matthews in Santander UK plc -v- The Royal Bank of Scotland plc [2015] EWHC 2560 (Ch) is an important review of the Norwich Pharmacal principles. However that is not what catches the eye.  For a while…

"HOW TO GET SUED, MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE": 22nd SEPTEMBER 2015: HARDWICKE BUILDING, LONDON: RAISING FUNDS FOR THE BILLABLE HOUR

September 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Service of the claim form, Striking out, Uncategorized, Witness statements

LITIGATORS: HOW TO GET SUED: MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE RAISING MONEY FOR THE BILLABLE HOUR APPEAL (ALL PROCEEDS GO TO THE APPEAL) Gordon Exall and PJ Kirby QC. Hardwicke Building, Lincoln’s Inn. TUESDAY 22nd SEPTEMBER 2015 5.30 -…

COSTS, CFAS, ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES AND GOING OUTSIDE PUBLIC FUNDING 2: SURREY -v- BARNET & CHASE

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

See the appeal on this case discussed here.  The previous post looked at the decision of Master Rowley in Hyde -v- Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B17 (Costs). In that case the Master decided that a decision to…

COSTS, CFAS, ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES AND GOING OUTSIDE PUBLIC FUNDING 1: HYDE -v- MILTON KEYNES

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB SEE THE APPEAL ON THESE ISSUES DISCUSSED HERE The decision of Master Rowley in Hyde -v- Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B17 (Costs) has today become available on Bailli. It contains important observations in relation to…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

Relief from sanctions following late service of the notice of funding was granted by Mr Justice Simon in Jackson -v- Thompson Solicitors (& others) [2015] EWHC 549 (QB). THE CASE The claimant had failed in an action against multiple defendants…

← Previous 1 … 28 29 30 … 35 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

  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)
  • PRACTICE DIRECTION CHANGES INTRODUCED YESTERDAY: NEW PROVISIONS IN THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL: “OTHER REMEDY” CLAIMS CAN NOW BE MADE
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 15: THE STUDENTS LOAN COMPANY MAY BE AN “EMANATION OF THE STATE”: SOME INTERESTING ISSUES HERE: THESE ARE ISSUES OF LAW – NOT ONE ON WHICH A WITNESS CAN EXPRESS AN OPINION OR VIEW…
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 14: CLAIMANT FAILS IN SLIPPING CASE: THERE WAS A “HYPOTHETICAL” RISK OF SLIPPING WHICH THE DEFENDANT DID NOT NEED TO DEAL WITH
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 13: WHERE THERE IS BLAME THERE IS NOT ALWAYS A CLAIM: THE DEFENDANT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BUT THE CLAIMANT’S ACTION FAILED

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.