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 33

MORE ON INDEMNITY COSTS AND THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AT TRIAL: INTERCITY TELECOMS -v- SOLANKI

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

NOTE THAT THIS JUDGMENT HAS BEEN OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL, SEE THE POST HERE  In Intercity Telecom -v- Solanki [2015] Judge Simon Brown QC awarded indemnity costs and assessed costs at the end of a trial. It is…

NO RE-ALLOCATION AT THE COURT OF APPEAL STAGE JUST TO GET COSTS: CONLON -v- ROYAL SUN INSURANCE PLC

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

In Conlon -v- Royal Sun Insurance plc [2015] EWCA Civ 92 the Court of Appeal refused to re-allocate a costs at the appeal stage when the application was made solely for the purpose of attempting to recover costs. THE ISSUES…

MORE ON BUNDLES: THERE IS MUCH TIME & MONEY TO BE SAVED YET

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Written advocacy

I have often commented (and been surprised) by the fact that a post on preparing trial bundles is always the most popular page on this blog.  Following a prompt from Dominic Regan it was interesting to watch the live feed…

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT NOT RECOVERING ALL OF ITS COSTS (AND OF THE ADVANTAGES OF A PART 36 OFFER)

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In Altus Group (UK) Limited -v- Baker Tilly [2015] EWHC 411 (Ch) HH Judge Keyser QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) made various orders in relation to the Defendant’s costs.  The Defendant did not recover all their costs of…

THE PROPOSED COURT FEE INCREASE: ACTION BY THE LAW SOCIETY – READ THE STATISTICS ABOUT ACCESS TO JUSTICE

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

The Law Society has sent a pre-action protocol letter for judicial review to challenge the government’s proposed increase in court fees. “State provision for people to redress wrongs through the courts is the hallmark of a civilised society.’ THE LAW…

A GAME OF MORE THAN ONE HALF: THE COSTS ORDER IN HAMED -v- TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR

February 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content

In Hamed -v- Mills & Tottenham Hotspur Football Club  [2015] EWHC 298 (QB)   Mr Justice Hickinbottom found negligence on the part of a doctor and football club in a claim brought by a professional football player. In a judgment, given…

IF YOU THINK "BIG MONEY" CASES AMOUNT TO A LICENCE TO INCUR COSTS THEN READ THIS

February 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In  Kazakhstan Kagazy PLC  -v-  Baglan Abdullayevich Zhunus [2015] EWHC 404 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt  makes important observations about costs; the basis for assessing costs in “big money” cases (if not all cases) and interim costs in a case where  the defendants’…

WHOLLY SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT RECOVERS ONLY TWO-THIRDS OF COSTS BECAUSE OF FAILURE TO ENGAGE IN ADR

February 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Witness statements

In Christian -v- The Commission of Police for the Metropolis [2015] EWHC 371 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the costs applications of a failure to a defendant to engage in mediation. THE CASE The claimant was unsuccessful in an action…

LENGTHY BUNDLES AND INTERIM COSTS: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE TECHNOLOGY & CONSTRUCTION COURT

February 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The two judgments of Mr Justice Akenhead in the Secretary of State for the Home Environment -v- Raythean Systems Limited [2014] EWHC 4375 (TCC) and [2015] EWHC 311 (TCC) contain some familiar motifs in relation to the size of bundles,…

ANOTHER CASE WHERE INDEMNITY COSTS AWARDED – FOR PART OF THE CLAIM

February 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content

There are now several posts on this blog considering the importance of an award for costs on an indemnity basis and cases where judges have considered this issue. Another example can be found in the decision of Stephen Jourdan QC…

MORE ON SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS & PROPORTIONALITY: NOT GOING FOR A SONG

February 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The issue of proportionate costs was considered  by Judge Behrens in Taylor -v- Bell & Haworth (16th February 2015). It provides a useful example of judicial comments in relation to disproportional costs. THE CASE The applicant was seeking a variation of…

SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE: SAY IT WITH FLOWERS

February 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We have looked, several times, at judgments which contain summary assessment of costs. Not least to get a flavour of the approach of the courts.   An assessment took place by Mr Justice Birss in Interflora -v- Marks & Spencer…

LITIGANTS IN PERSON INCREASE USE OF RESOURCES NOT SAVE THEM: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

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

In Linder -v- Rawlins [2015] EWCA Civ 61 the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal of a litigant in person appealing in relation to certain aspects of disclosure in a divorce petition.  What is particularly telling is that part of…

WHAT THE JACKSON REPORT SAID ABOUT COURT FEES: TOO HIGH AND SHOULD BE USED TO IMPROVE CIVIL JUSTICE SYSTEM

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

The government, and the Ministry of Justice in particular, has been keen to advocate  and implement the Jackson reports. The costs of litigation should be proportional and, in effect, this means reduced.  However in all the discussions in relation to…

JOINDER OF A PARTY FOR COSTS, INDEMNITY COSTS & COMMENTS ON COSTS OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET: EXCELERATE TECHNOLOGY ROUND 2

February 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We looked earlier at the observations on costs in giving judgment in Excelerate Technology Ltd -v- Cumberbatch [2015] EWHC B1 Mercantile. A supplementary judgment on the costs issues is now available.  It contains the rationale for the matters discussed in the…

WHEN WILL INDEMNITY COSTS BE ORDERED? A HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

February 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Expert evidence, Members Content, Written advocacy

Indemnity costs now carry extra weight in that, on assessment, the court is not bound by the principle of proportionality. In Siegel -v- Pummell [2015] EWHC 195 (QB) Mr Justice Wilkie reviewed the relevant principles in relation to indemnity costs….

EARLY CONTENDERS FOR WORST PUNS ON CIVIL CASES 2015: YOU JUDGE THE STANDARD

February 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

In the annual review of civil litigation of 2014 there was an easy winner for the case that gave rise to the most, and worst, puns.  There is an early contender for this award in 2015. Since this competition is…

GUIDANCE GIVEN AS COSTS BUDGETING IN PRACTICE: CONTINGENCIES, RATES AND TIMING: YEO -v- TIMES NEWSPAPERS LIMITED

February 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Tim Yeo MP -v- Times Newspapers Limited [2015] EWHC 209 (QB) contains some interesting observations in relation to pleading allegations of fraud.  However here we look at the judge’s observations in relation to…

THE RIHANNA CASE AND COSTS: A QUICK CODA

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

The main judgment in the Rihanna case was considered in an earlier post which considered the problems caused by witnesses giving opinion evidence. There is a short supplementary judgment Fenty -v- Arcadia Group Brands Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 38 which…

COSTS AGAINST NON-PARTIES: NOTHING LOST IN TRANSLATION: THE CAPITA CASE CONSIDERED

February 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The decision today of Sir James Munby In the Matter of Capita Translation and Interpreting Limited [2015] EWFC 5 reiterates the principles of costs against third parties. The judgment contains a detailed review of the law relating to cost liability…

CHILDREN CASES AND THE RECOVERY OF A SUCCESS FEE: CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE ON APRIL 6th

February 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Damages, Members Content

Amidst all the changes to Part 36 it is easy to miss the fact that changes in relation to children cases on the 6th April 2015. In essence this provides a mechanism for the court to consider the deduction of…

THE MITCHELL CASE AND COSTS: IN THE NEWS AGAIN

January 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

My apologies for relying on a non-legal source. However the BBC reports that Mr Mitchell has been ordered to pay both sets of costs in the defamation action. THE CASE BBC News reports a decision of Mr Justice Mitting that…

PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS: DEPARTING FROM COST BUDGETS AND FAILURE TO SERVE COST SCHEDULES: A HIGH COURT DECISION

January 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

In Simpson -v- MGN Limited [2015] EWHC 126 (QB) Mr Justice Warby considered several contentions in relation to costs budgeting; non-service of costs schedules and proportionality. This is, again, a case that serves as an object lesson as to the…

CFA NOT FRUSTRATED BY CAPACITY: BLANKLEY APPEAL DRAWS A BLANK FOR DEFENDANT

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

In Blankley -v- Central Manchester and Manchester Children’s University Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWCA Civ 18, where judgment was given today, the Court of Appeal upheld the first instance decision that a claimant’s subsequent incapacity does not invalidate a claimant’s…

APPEALING COSTS BUDGETS: THE RELEVANT CRITERIA CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

January 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The decision of H H Judge Freedman in Havenga -v- Gateshead NHS Foundation Trust [2014] EWHC B25(QB) demonstrates how difficult it is for a party to appeal a costs budget. THE CASE The claimant was bringing a claim for hemiplegic…

THE DANGERS OF A PART 36 OFFER: CLAIMANT PAYS THREE TIMES MORE IN COSTS THAN HE RECEIVED IN DAMAGES

January 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The dangers of a claimant rejecting a Part 36 offer are clearly demonstrated in the case of UWUG Ltd & Haiss -v- Ball [2015] EWHC 74 (IPEC). The claimant received damages of £2,859.20 but was ordered to pay the defendant…

COSTS AT THE END OF THE CASE: THE JUDGE CAN MAKE OBSERVATIONS ABOUT MATTERS OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET

January 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The judgment of H.H. Judge Simon Brown Q.C in Excelerate Technology Ltd -v- Cumberbatch [2015] EWHC B1 Mercantile contains some interesting observations at the end. This illustrates the need for trial counsel to be aware of both the costs budget…

LET THE COURT KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT IS GOING TO COST: A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT

January 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Expert evidence, Members Content

The short judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Sloutsker -v- Romanova [2015] EWHC 81(QB) contains some important observations about preparing for hearings. It also serves as a timely reminder that a party asking for permission to instruct an expert must…

GET BUNDLES AND SKELETON ARGUMENTS TO COURT – OR ELSE: CHIEF CONSTABLE COPS IT

January 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Serving documents, Written advocacy

There is a brief report on Lawtel today of the case of Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice (QB Phillips J 20/01/2015)*. It provides an object lesson on the need for all parties (and non-parties) to lodge – or re-lodge -…

SUBSTANTIAL COSTS INCURRED IN ARGUING ABOUT COSTS: NIGHTMARE IN BELGRAVIA?

January 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Chliafichtein -v-Wainbridge Estates Belgravia Ltd [2015] EWHC 47 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson made some comments in relation to the escalation of costs in preparing for an argument about who should pay the costs. THE CASE The claimant obtained an…

PROPOSALS FOR INCREASED COURT FEES: MONITORING THE PROPOSALS AND THE DEBATES

January 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Rule Changes, Useful links

There is a section on this blog which provides regularly updated links to posts and articles on civil procedure.  However the issue of the major proposed increase in court fees is such a major issue I am giving this its…

COSTS REDUCED FROM £201,000 TO £96,465 ON SUMMARY ASSESSMENT: A WORKING EXAMPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY IN PRACTICE

January 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

It is always useful to look at the way in which courts are carrying out summary assessments.  Another interesting example of the pragmatic approach adopted can be found in the judgment of Mr Justice Akenhead in Savoye -v- Spicers Ltd…

£3,500 DAMAGES: A 10 DAY TRIAL: 3 DAYS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: £500,000 IN COSTS: BLEAK HOUSE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

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

In Gilks -v- Hodgson [2015] EWCA Civ 5 the Court of Appeal had strong words to say about the costs of a boundary dispute. The observations should be read by anyone tempted to litigate about these issues. THE CASE The…

RECEIVERS, EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND RIGOROUS COSTS BUDGETING TO ENSURE PROPORTIONALITY

January 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The Denton principles were considered by Mr Registrar Jones in Justice Capital Ltd -v- Murphy [2014] All ER (D) 187 (Dec).  There were important issues in relation to proportionality and costs. Of particular interest is the rigorous case management and…

ENTERPRISE, PROPORTIONALITY, WITNESS STATEMENTS AND UNNECESSARY COSTS: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

January 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

In Enterprise Holdings, Inc -v- Europcar Group UK Ltd [2015] EWHC 17 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold made some telling remarks which bear on proportionality, witness evidence and costs. THE CASE The dispute related to the use of a “e” logo…

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE'S REPORT 2014: CIVIL JUSTICE

January 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links

The Lord Chief Justice’s Report for 2014 is available online.  It covers many aspects of the judicial system. Here we look at the report in relation to civil justice, THE REPORT On civil justice the Report identifies 5 key areas:…

THE NEW PART 36: PART 10: PULLING IT ALL TOGETHER: 18 KEY POINTS

January 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

This post provides a summary of the changes to Part 36 and then considers the practical implications of the new rules, including the implications for on-going litigation. There are links to the relevant posts on the issue and a summary…

THE NEW PART 36: PART 9: HOW IT REFLECTS AND CHANGES THE EXISTING CASE LAW

January 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This is the 9th in the series on the new Part 36. Here we deal with the relevant case law which may be changed by the new rules. THE EXPLANATORY TEXT Rule changes are usually accompanied by helpful explanatory notes….

PROPORTIONALITY & SURVIVAL FOR LITIGATORS: PART 2: A WHOLE NEW APPROACH?

January 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

It is no accident that there is nearly a month between the first post in this series and the second. Nor is it surprising that very little (if anything) has been written on “proportional” litigation.  This is a difficult subject….

THE NEW PART 36: PART 8: STRUCTURE OF THE NEW RULE AND A RECAP OF POSTS TO DATE

January 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury, Useful links

Here we look at the structure of the new Part 36. The section part of this post recaps and provides links to the earlier posts on the new Part 36.  Future posts will deal with the impact of the new…

THE NEW PART 36: PART 6: PERSONAL INJURY CASES

January 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury

This is the sixth in the series of posts dealing with the new rules governing Part 36 coming into force in April 2015. This post deals with a new section of Part 36 on personal injury cases.  This appears to…

THE NEW PART 36: PART 5: WAS THE OFFER A "GENUINE ATTEMPT" TO SETTLE PROCEEDINGS?

December 30, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

One addition to the rule is a further factor for the court to take into account when considering whether or not the usual costs, and other consequences, of Part 36 should apply. THE NEW CPR 36.17: COSTS CONSEQUENCES FOLLOWING JUDGMENT…

THE NEW PART 36: PART 4: WHERE A COSTS BUDGET IS LIMITED TO COURT FEES

December 30, 2014 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

This is the fourth in the series of posts on the new Part 36 coming into force on the 6th April 2015. The rules contain a brand new provision that deals with the position where a offeror’s costs are limited…

THE NEW PART 36: PART 3: UNACCEPTED OFFERS AND INCREASED RESTRICTIONS ON DISCLOSURE OF OFFERS

December 30, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This is the third in the series of posts that deals with the Part 36 provisions coming into force on the 6th April 2015. Here we look at the rules restricting disclosure of a Part 36 offer and some important…

THE NEW PART 36 PART 2: OTHER EFFECTS OF ACCEPTING A PART 36 OFFER

December 29, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Rule Changes

This is the second part of a series dealing with the new provisions of Part 36 which comes into force on the 6th April 2015. The first in the series can be found here. Here we look at the new…

ADMISSION UNDER THE PROTOCOL AND PORTAL MAY NOT BE BINDING IN SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS

December 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Is an admission made by an insurer under the Portal binding on the parties in  a future action? In September last year we looked at the case of Ullah -v- Jon where a district judge held that an admission was…

E-DISCLOSURE & BREACH OF ORDERS: CASE STRUCK OUT: NO QUESTION: AND NO QUARTER GIVEN

December 20, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content, Striking out

In Smailes -v-McNally [2014] EWCA Civ 1296 the Court of Appeal made it clear that breach of a peremptory order in relation to disclosure will lead to grave consequences for the defaulting litigant. THE CASE This case was looked at…

THE NEW PART 36: COMING TO YOUR PRACTICES SOON: PART 1

December 18, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Rule Changes

The “new” Part 36 comes into force on the 6th April 2015. Here I provide the first part a summary of the main chances.  To prevent any confusion this post only cites the new rules. THERE IS NOW AN EXPRESS…

THE DENTON PRINCIPLES AND SEEKING TO AVOID PAYING MONEY DUE UNDER COURT ORDERS

December 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The application of the Denton principles was considered by Mr Justice Peter Smith in Mulugeta Guadie Mangiste -v- Endownment Fund for the Rehabilitation of Tigray [2014] EWHC 4196 (Ch) when reviewing an argument that the claimant should not pay an order for…

SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: AN IMPORTANT EXAMPLE

December 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

This blog has looked at examples of  the summary assessment of costs before. These do not give rise to any great principles or points of law. Summary assessments are rarely (if ever) reported. Virtually every litigator is going to be…

← Previous 1 … 32 33 34 … 36 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS…)
  • THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
  • EXPERT WATCH 71: “I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE”: THE EXPERT WAS “ADVOCATING” AND “HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
  • MORE ABOUT THE CASE AGAINST A SOLICITOR BEING STRUCK OUT: THE ABSENCE OF AN ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITY MEANT THERE WAS NO CASE: A CLAIMANT CANNOT HOPE THAT “SOMETHING WILL TURN UP” ON DISCLOSURE…

Top Posts

TUPE DOES NOT PASS ON LIABILITIES TO THIRD PARTIES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
EXPERT WATCH 70: EXPERTS' FAILURES TO REPORT ON THE RANGE OF OPINIONS LEADS TO THEIR VIEWS BEING REJECTED: ESSENTIAL READING FOR EVERY PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYER, ANYONE WHO INSTRUCTS AN EXPERT (AND ANY EXPERT...)
THE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AND ONE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: DECISION TO STRIKE OUT ALLOWED ON APPEAL BECAUSE THE JUDGE HAD WRONGLY CONSIDERED THE MERITS
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (2): HOW TO SPOT "FALSE" AUTHORITIES AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT (PLUS SOME USEFUL LINKS)
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (3): AI AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: VERY DANGEROUS BEDFELLOWS: TWENTY KEY POINTS

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