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 32

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…

HIGHER COURT FEES IN THE (NOT TOO DISTANT) FUTURE: THE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

August 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The government response to the consultation process on court fees is now available. WHAT IT SAYS (“FOR THE MOST PART WE HAVE IGNORED EVERYONE AND THE INCREASES WILL GO AHEAD IN ANY EVENT”). “Following a consultation launched by the Coalition…

THE EFFECT OF QOCS ON LITIGATION: HERE'S THE THING: CASES WILL BE FOUGHT ON THEIR MERITS

August 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There has been much debate about the impact of QOCS on litigation. To date much of this has, inevitably, been speculative. However it is worthwhile reading George Riley’s article, Fundamental dishonesty and litigation in the post-Jackson landscape.  This shows, honestly…

"CONDUCT UNRAVELS ALL": INDEMNITY COSTS AND COSTS ON ACCOUNT: A FAMILY CASE

August 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in  Joy -v- Joy-Morancho (No 3) [2015] EWHC 2507 (Fam) Mr Peter Singer awarded indemnity costs against the respondent husband.  Many of the observations  in relation to costs are of general relevance to civil litigators as…

MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT LEADS TO REDUCTION OF COSTS BY 50%: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND NHS FOUNDATION TRUST

August 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is a report on Lawtel today of 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 50% because of misconduct in the assessment…

QOCS, STRIKING OUT AND THE LIABILITY TO PAY IN FULL: A COUNTY COURT DECISION

August 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Colm Nugent of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me a copy of the judgment in Wall -v- British Canoe Union. A decision of HH Judge Lopez in Birmingham County Court on the 30th July 2015.  The judgment…

PROPORTIONALITY, ASSESSMENT AND THE COSTS OF BUDGETING: SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

August 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In BP -v- Cardiff & Vale University Local Health Board [2015] EWHC B13 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker considered several issues relating to proportionality; the format of bills and the costs of costs budgeting. “Having conducted an assessment of the reasonableness of…

CHILDREN, SUCCESS FEES AND DEDUCTIONS FROM DAMAGES : AN IMPORTANT JUDGMENT

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content, Success Fees, Uncategorized

The question of child claimants and deductions from damages remains a live and controversial one. The judgment on this issue of the regional costs judge,District Judge Lumb in A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th…

NEW BILL OF COSTS CONSULTATION: A USEFUL LINK

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

A pilot scheme is being introduced for a new bill of costs model. Initially voluntary the scheme may become compulsory. THE DRAFT BILL AND GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS Useful guidance is available on the Hailsham Chambers website.  The draft bill and guidance…

COSTS: THE FACT YOU CAN'T PAY MAKES NO DIFFERENCE: AN IMPORTANT LESSON FOR LITIGANTS

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Bridge -v- Daley [2015] EWHC 2121 (Ch) Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered submissions made in relation to a losing party paying costs. THE CASE The claimant sought permission to continue a derivative…

LITIGATION AS IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE: GOTCH -v- ENELCO

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Gotch -v- Enelco Ltd [2015] EWHC 1802 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart had strong words to say about the conduct of litigation and costs. KEY POINTS This is a case where five short passages from the judgment itself gives the…

ESSENTIAL READING: "FEES A CROWD WHEN JUSTICE AND POLITICS COLLIDE": A NLJ & LSLA PUBLICATION

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

There is a section on this  blog devoted to links to posts on procedure and costs. Occasionally, however, a post is so important that I feel compelled to draw attention to it. This definitely applies to the publication “Litigation Trends…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS AWARD OF INDEMNITY COSTS

August 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Arcadia Group Brands Ltd -v- Visa Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 883 the Court of Appeal, dismissed an appeal on the merits,  but nevertheless overturned the judge’s order for indemnity costs. THE CASE The claimants were bringing actions for breaches…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 3: THE COURT OF APPEAL AND ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS

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

This is the third case today about the issue of costs and the conduct of proceedings. It is the most  complex, Smith & Nephew plc -v- ConvaTec Technologies Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 803. THE CASE The Court of Appeal allowed…

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…

← Previous 1 … 31 32 33 … 37 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 448: PART 36 AND FIXED COSTS: “VERY LATE” ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT’S OFFER LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING NO COSTS AT ALL
  • COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
  • SERVICE POINTS 56 : PERSONAL SERVICE NOT EFFECTED: COURT RETROSPECTIVELY APPROVES ALTERNATIVE SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS IN CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
  • DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU COULD BE MADE BANKRUPT (OSTENSIBLY ON YOUR OWN APPLICATION), NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT – AND THEN HAVE TO PAY THE TRUSTEE’S COSTS? THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING KEY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: A CASE WHERE THE SOLICITORS’ EVIDENCE (OF THEIR OWN) LOSS WAS “WHOLLY INADEQUATE” (OCTOBER 2017)

Top Posts

COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU...)
EXPERT WATCH 78 : "ROWING BACK"?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: "THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT"
CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS, CHANGE OF SOLICITORS AND RATIFICATION AND INFORMED ADVICE: IT IS NOT SO EASY TO SIMPLY RECOMMEND A CHANGE OF SOLICITORS...
COST BITES 466: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ABILITY TO AWARD INTEREST ON COSTS TO LITIGANTS CONDUCTING LITIGATION ON A CFA

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.