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 30

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…

COSTS & CONDUCT 1: MULTIPLE PARTIES, "BULLOCK" AND "SANDERSON" ORDERS AND INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE DEFENDANTS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are several cases today where the courts have considered the issue of where costs should fall and how judicial discretion should be exercised.  The first we consider is Asghar -v- Ahmad [2015] EWHC 2234 (QB) a decision of Mr…

IF YOU ENTER INTO A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT WITH YOUR CLIENT ARE YOU PLAYING RUSSIAN ROULETTE?

July 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Campbell in Addleshaw Goddard LLP  -v- Wood & Hellard [2015] EWHC B12 (Costs) has some interesting observations on contentious business agreements and the nature of litigation financing generally. THE CASE The claimant solicitors had entered into…

NEW RULES RELATING TO "NEUTRAL EVALUATION" ; LITIGANTS IN PERSON; ASSESSMENT; SPECIALIST FINANCIAL LIST (AND MORE…)

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

New rules have been introduced which (for the most part) come into force on the 1st October 2015.  Here we look at the key changes. THE RULES The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.4) Rules 2014 were laid before Parliament on the…

THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS OF QOCS: IMPORTANT AND INTERESTING DECISION: THE MEANING OF "PROCEEDINGS"

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting decision on checkmylegalfees.com website in relation to the transitional provisions of the QOCS regulations.  The full transcript of Casseldine -v- The Diocese of Llandaff Board for Social Responsibility (Regional Costs Judge Phillips, Cardiff County Court 15th…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS NOT SENT TO COVENTRY: KEY POINTS AND LINKS

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

The decision in Coventry -v- Lawrence [2015] UKSC 50 has not led to any major change in practice and procedure (in relation to a costs regime that had already ended anyway). A link to the judgment is here  KEY POINTS…

JUSTICE COMMITTEE INQUIRY IN THE EFFECTS OF THE INCREASE IN COURT FEES: HOW TO RESPOND

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

The Justice Committee is holding an inquiry into the effects of the introduction and levels of the increased court fees. If anyone wants to send their responses to this blog, in addition to the inquiry, I will arrange a specific…

ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: A MATTER OF RISKS AND REWARDS

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In The Queen on the application of British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authorts -v- the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2015] EWHC 2401 (Admin) Mr Justice Green made an issue based costs order. THE CASE The…

SETTING ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE IN A QOCS CASE: TWO INTERESTING DECISIONS

July 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, QOCS

I am grateful to Rebecca Jones of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me details of an important decision in relation to setting aside a notice of discontinuance served by a claimant in a costs case. The note of the judgment below…

SOLICITORS ARE ENTITLED TO ARGUE THEY SHOULD BE PAID AND ARE NOT LITIGANTS IN PERSON: A HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

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

In EMW Law LLP -v- Halborg [2015] EWHC 2005 (Ch) His Honour Judge Purle QC considered some important elements in relation to the ability of solicitors to recover their costs. The judge also found that solicitors are not “litigants in person”…

RETROSPECTIVE CCFA WAS VALID (BUT ONLY JUST): CFAS "AWASH IN A SEA OF ILLEGALITY":THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE

July 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Pentecost -v- John [2015] EWHC 1970 (QB) Turner J (sitting with Master Leonard as an assessor) held that a retrospective Collective Conditional Fee Agreement was valid between the client and their solicitors, thus valid for the purpose of enforcing…

COSTS: INDEMNITY COSTS; IMMEDIATE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS; SET OFF & POTENTIAL INSOLVENCY: A HIGH COURT DECISION

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

In Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA -v- ITG [2015] EWHC 1924 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered issues relating to indemnity costs and whether assessment of costs ordered on an interlocutory hearing should take place forthwith. KEY POINTS Although the conduct…

THE LIMITS OF ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: COMMERCIAL LITIGATION IS ABOUT MONEY (WHO KNEW?)

THE LIMITS OF ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: COMMERCIAL LITIGATION IS ABOUT MONEY (WHO KNEW?)

June 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In The Northampton Regional Livestock Centre Company Ltd -v- Cowling [2015] EWCA Civ 651 the Court of Appeal made some important observations about costs, issue based orders and success, particularly in commercial cases. THE CASE The Court of Appeal were…

A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT ATTRACT INDEMNITY COSTS: GULATI -v- MGN

June 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Gulati -v- MGN [2015] EWHC 1805 (Ch) Mr Justice Mann considered whether indemnity costs should be awarded in circumstances where a Part 36 offer was withdrawn in one case and a “Calderbank” offer made in the other. KEY POINTS…

EVIDENCE, COSTS AND THE CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES: A CANADIAN VIEW

June 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has discussed  issues relating to the judicial approach of  the credibility  of witnesses many times.  Some judges have, shall we say, not been backward in giving their views on the “value” of the evidence of some of the…

PREVIOUS COSTS ORDERS STAND EVEN AFTER DISCONTINUANCE: A HIGH COURT DECISION

June 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Company -v- Al Refai [2015] EWHC 1793 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Smith considered whether discontinuance of an action should have an effect on previous costs orders. THE CASE The claimants had agreed terms of…

INCREASED COSTS AND "MYSTIFYING" PLEADINGS: A WARNING TO THOSE DRAFTING DEFENCES: IT'S GOING TO COST YOU

June 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Edis in Davies -v- Forrett [2015] EWHC 1761 QB is an object lesson on the dangers of lax pleading. Denying the relevance of a conviction in a pleading led to the joinder of a number…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND COSTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: NO DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR THE GOVERNMENT

June 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In The Queen (on the application of Bhatt) -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1724 (Admin) Helen Mountfield QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge) made some interesting observations in relation to the Denton principles, conduct…

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…

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…

SUCCESS FEES : DEFECTIVE NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A WHOLE BUNDLE OF ISSUES

June 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The decision of Mr Justice Edis in O’Brien -v- Shorrock & the MIB [2015] EWHC 1630 (QB) deals with a number of important issues in relation to costs, notice of funding, the backdating of conditional fee agreements  and relief from sanctions. THE…

RECOVERY OF THE INSURANCE PREMIUM IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: 10 KEY POINTS

June 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content

The recent post on the decision in Nokes -v- Heart of England Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B6 highlighted the issues relating to recoverability of the premium in clinical negligence cases.  Here is a 10 point summary: 1.  ONLY  THAT PART…

PERCENTAGE COSTS ORDERS AFTER A TRIAL: ISSUE BY ISSUE DEDUCTIONS

June 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Arnold in Novartis AG -v- Focus Pharmaceuticals Limited [2015] EWHC 1553 (Pat) is another example of an approach to percentage costs orders and interim orders for costs after a trial.  The judge ordered that 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…

AFTER THE EVENT PREMIUM BOTH RECOVERABLE, REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONATE

June 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content

When is an after the event premium and when is it recoverable? The decision of Master Leonard (sitting as a Judge of the Mayor’s and City County Court) in Nokes -v- Heart of England Foundation Trusts [2015] EWHC B6 (Costs)…

A SORRY TALE OF MODERN LITIGATION: ALL AROUND THE HOUSES

May 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Risks of litigation

There are some cases where the “reasonable bystander” may feel that all rationality has been lost by the litigants. Read the opening paragraph of Mr Justice Akenhead’s judgment in Mears Ltd -v- Shoreline Housing Partnership Limited [2015] EWHC 1396 (TCC)….

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…

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…

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…

VERY IMPORTANT DECISION ON PART 36 OFFERS, ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS WHEN OFFERS NOT BEATEN

May 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The decision of Mrs Justice Slade DBE in Cashman -v- Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1312 (QB) deals with the additional sums that a party may have to pay when it fails to beat a Part 36 offer….

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…

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…

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…

JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE MADE COSTS ORDER WHICH WIPED OUT CLAIMANT'S DAMAGES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

April 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content

In Begum -v- Birmingham City Council [2015] EWCA Civ 386 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by a claimant where the decision on costs at first instance effectively deprived her of damages. THE CASE The issue is succinctly summarised…

THE "URGENT NEED FOR COMMERCIAL PRACTITIONERS TO BRING A SENSE OF PROPORTION" TO LITIGATION: EVIDENCE NEEDED IN WHEN ARGUING SECURITY FOR COSTS "STIFLES" AN ACTION.

April 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc -v- Baglan Zhunus [2015] EWHC 996 Mr Justice Walker had strong words to say, and constructive guidance to give, in relation to some aspects of commercial litigation.  The case further serves as a reminder of the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, EXHIBITS AND NOT MAKING AN EXHIBITION OF YOURSELF: THE OFTEN IGNORED RULES ABOUT EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

April 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Liability, Members Content

Your life will not be complete unless you have read a post about exhibits to witness statements. The “exhibiting” of documents is common. It is surprising how common it is for the exhibit, and the witness statement, to fail to…

COSTS OF EXPERTS AND GOING OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET: THE HIGH COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND BUDGETED ITEMS AFTER A TRIAL

April 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Expert evidence, Members Content

In Parish -v- The Danwood Group Ltd [2015] EWHC 940(QB) HH Judge Behrens (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered various issues relating to the costs budget at the end of a trial. THE CASE The claimants were…

CHANGES TO THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOLS THAT WE KNOW ABOUT: LOW VALUE ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS

April 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Rule Changes, Useful links

Important changes have been made to the Pre-Action Protocols which came into force yesterday. At the moment the whereabout of the the Protocols is a mystery in that they have not been published generally. However there are some changes to…

PERCENTAGE COSTS ORDERS AFTER A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: A HIGH COURT DECISION

April 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury

In Webb -v- Liverpool Womens’ NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 449(QB) HH Judge Saffman (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the consequences where a claimant had beaten their own Part 36 offer at trial. NB this aspect of the…

THE LAST WORKING DAYS OF THE "OLD" PART 36: LINKS TO POSTS & ARTICLES ON THE NEW RULES

April 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The new Part 36 comes into force on the 6th April. Here are links to posts and guidance in relation to the new rules on this blog and then links to many other commentators. POSTS ON THE NEW PART 36…

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

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

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

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

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

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

PROPORTIONALITY, BUNDLES AND £3 MILLION SPENT ON COSTS: FAMILY COURT ON PROFLIGATE EXPENDITURE

March 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Costs, Members Content

We have looked at the family courts from time to time in relation to procedure, costs and proportionality. Another example is provided by the judgment of Mr Justice Holman in the case of Gray -v- Work [2015] EWHC 834 (Fam)….

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE DEBATE ON COURT FEES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS: WELL WORTH READING

March 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

Every litigator should read the debate on court fees that was held in the House of Lords. There are some trenchant criticisms of the MO(i)J which was responded to by “cant”.  I have highlighted passages of interest but this is…

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

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

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

← Previous 1 … 29 30 31 … 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

  • THE DEFENDANT’S ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER FROM THE CLAIMANT DID NOT PREVENT A SECOND ACTION IN RELATION TO A DIFFERENT (BUT RELATED) ISSUE
  • COST BITES 384: THE LOSER OF AN APPLICATION USUALLY PAYS AND THERE HAS TO BE A GOOD REASON IF THEY DON’T: APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS A DECISION TO THE CONTRARY
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A USEFUL ENCAPSULATION OF THE COURT’S APPROACH TO DISPUTED WITNESS EVIDENCE: WITNESSES CAN LIE FOR VARIOUS REASONS
  • AN INSURER’S ADMISSION BINDS INSURED DEFENDANT EVEN THOUGH INDEMNITY WAS SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN: APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM THAT ADMISSION DISMISSED…
  • SERVICE POINTS 39: ISSUES OVER CORRECT SPANISH ADDRESS DID NOT RENDER SERVICE INVALID

Top Posts

  • COST BITES 384: THE LOSER OF AN APPLICATION USUALLY PAYS AND THERE HAS TO BE A GOOD REASON IF THEY DON'T: APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS A DECISION TO THE CONTRARY
  • THE DEFENDANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER FROM THE CLAIMANT DID NOT PREVENT A SECOND ACTION IN RELATION TO A DIFFERENT (BUT RELATED) ISSUE
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A USEFUL ENCAPSULATION OF THE COURT'S APPROACH TO DISPUTED WITNESS EVIDENCE: WITNESSES CAN LIE FOR VARIOUS REASONS
  • AN INSURER'S ADMISSION BINDS INSURED DEFENDANT EVEN THOUGH INDEMNITY WAS SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN: APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM THAT ADMISSION DISMISSED...
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT TO WEAR TO COURT: "IF YOU ATTEND COURT DRESSED INAPPROPRIATELY, COURT STAFF MAY REFUSE YOU ENTRY"

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.