Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Expert evidence » Page 10

THE INTERCHANGE BETWEEN LAWYERS & EXPERTS: A DIFFICULT ISSUE

May 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In a week where there is a report of an application being made for a doctor to be committed for contempt* it is prudent to consider that difficult issue of the relationship between the lawyers in a case and the…

THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION TO ADJOURN CANNOT BE IGNORED

May 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

A post last week noted the decision of the Court of Appeal in TBO Investments Ltd -v- Mohun Smith EWCA Civ 403 where the court stated that an application under CPR 39.3 should have been allowed when a defendant failed…

PROVING THINGS 15: DAMAGES & EVIDENCE: GOING BACK TO COLLEGE

April 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

One harsh shock for many litigants occurs when they are asked to prove their damages at trial. We have looked several times when a litigant has come to grief at this stage, largely because there is no evidential support for…

EXPERT REPORTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: PART 35 APPLIES

April 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Khaled -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 857 (Admin) Mr Justice Garnham considered Part 35 of the CPR and the admissibility of expert reports in proceedings in the Administrative Court. “The…

IS THIS AN EXPERT REPORT I SEE BEFORE ME? I THINK NOT

March 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Al Nehayan -v- Kent [2016] EWHC 623 (QB) Mrs Justice Nicola Davies made observations upon “expert” evidence that had been placed before the court.  There were major failures of form as well as of substance.  The judgment contains an…

DISCLOSURE AND PREDICTIVE CODING: PYHRRO EXPLAINED FOR THE TYRO

February 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

There has been much written already in relation to the decision of Master Matthews in Pyrrho Investments Ltd -v- MWB Property Ltd [2016] EWHC 256 (Ch) [see the links below]. However I want to concentrate upon the fact that this…

PROVING THINGS 9: THE ROLE OF EXPERTS

February 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Here I want to pick up on a few observations of Mr Justice Snowden in Grant -v-Ralls [2016] EWHC 243 (Ch) a case we looked at yesterday.   That is the role of the experts. It is dangerous to defer the “proving”…

PROVING THINGS 8: DEFENDANT MUST PROVE THAT FAILURE TO WEAR A SEATBELT MADE A DIFFERENCE

February 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The defendant bears the burden not only of proving contributory negligence but also establishing its causative relevance. The law in Syred -v- Powszecnny Zaklad Ubezpieczen (PZU) SA [2016] EWHC 254 (QB) (Mr Justice Soole) was complex, however one key point…

THE ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS IN LITIGATION: SUPREME COURT GUIDANCE

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Kennedy -v- Cordia Services LLP [2016] UKSC 6 the Supreme Court made some telling observations relating to expert evidence.  This was in the context of a Scottish case, however the observations are of general importance. THE CASE The Supreme Court…

PROVING THINGS 5: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND FAILING ON CAUSATION

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abdel-Khalek -v- Qazi Ali [2016] EWCA Civ 80 demonstrates both the difficulties of compounding lay and “expert” evidence and how a case can fail on causation. KEY POINTS The burden was on…

EVIDENCE, DAMAGES AND A SOLICITOR'S GOODWILL

January 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal decision in Karim -v- Wemyss [2016] EWCA Civ 27 has already received some publicity, involving as it does litigation following the sale of a solicitor’s practice.  However the decision also shows the dangers of not bringing…

COSTS AFTER A SPLIT TRIAL: PART 36; UNNECESSARY EXPERT REPORTS; PROPORTIONALITY AND USELESS BUNDLES: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The short judgment of Mr Justice Males in C&S  Associates UK Limited -v- Enterprise Insurance Company PLC [2016] EWHC 67 (Comm) encapsulates many of the problems of contemporary litigation. “It is important that those litigating in this court are aware…

PERMISSION NOT GRANTED TO CALL EMPLOYMENT EXPERTS: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine [2016] EWHC 45 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone and Master Leslie considered the rules and case law in relation to the need to call expert witnesses in detail. KEY POINTS The claimants were refused…

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…

SOME WITNESSES MAY NOT BE GOOD HISTORIANS BUT GOOD HISTORIANS CANNOT BE WITNESSES

December 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Kimathi -v- Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2015]EWHC 3432 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart considered a number of issues relating to witness statements. Here we consider whether the evidence of historians is admissible.  Other aspects of this case will be examined…

THAT DIFFICULT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN EXPERT WITNESS AND AN ADVOCATE

December 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In AAW -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKUT 673 (IAT) Upper Tribunal Judge Southern made some telling observations on the role of an expert. The judgment is of general interest in relation to the role…

IS AN EXPERT REALLY NECESSARY? TWO RECENT CASES

December 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The determination of the courts to restrict the use of expert evidence can be seen by the fact that the text of CPR 35.1 appears under the heading “duty to restrict expert evidence”. The rule itself states “Expert evidence shall be…

WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO DISCLOSE THAT THEY KNOW THE PARTIES

December 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

A recent high profile criminal case has identified the major problems that can arise when an expert called to give evidence has failed to disclose that they have had previous dealings with the parties.  Here we look at how the…

LATE EXPERT EVIDENCE, DENTON AND WAVING A FINGER IN THE AIR

December 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The decision of the Court of Appeal in O’Connor -v- The Pennine Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWCA 1244 will receive much attention for the important observations made as to evidence, proof and “res ipsa loquitur”.   However here I want…

WHEN THE CREDIBILITY OF THE LAY AND EXPERT WITNESSES LIES IN SHREDS

November 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The previous post in relation to Part 36 led me to examine the substantive judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Van Oord UK Limited -v- Allseas UK Limited [2015] EWHC 3074 (TCC). It contains as damning an assessment of witness…

COMMENT POSING AS CROSS-EXAMINATION: "INAPPROPRIATE AND IMPROPER"

November 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

When does cross-examination turn to comment? That is a question all working advocates have to consider, both in relation to their own cross-examination of witnesses, and responding  to their opponents. There are some important observations by Mr Justice McCloskey in…

DEFENDANT NOT ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION AND DEBARRED FROM RELYING ON FURTHER EVIDENCE: PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT

November 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Clark -v- Braintree Clinical Services Limited [2015] EWHC 3181 HH Judge Burrell QC  (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a defendant’s application to resile from an admission. He also granted the claimant’s application to debar the defendant from…

WITNESS EVIDENCE & THE BURDEN OF PROOF: A CIVIL TRIAL IS NOT A SEARCH FOR THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH: FOOTBALLERS ON TRIAL

October 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Anyone looking for a detailed consideration of the law relating to witness evidence and the burden of proof can find it in the judgment of His Honour Judge Butler  (sitting as a High Court judge) in GB -v- Stoke City…

THE EXPERT WITNESS THAT TELLS THE JUDGE THE "FACTS": A REVIEW OF RECENT CASES

October 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been a number of recent cases where judges have considered the effect of expert witnesses commenting on primary facts. The judiciary have traditionally, and rightly, guarded their role as primary fact finder.  However this does not appear to…

GUIDANCE TO EXPERTS: CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL: WHO DOES AN EXPERT "REPRESENT"?

September 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

It is rare that lawyers can look to the British Dental Journal for advice on procedure and evidence.  However there is a beautifully phrased letter in the British Dental Journal “reviewing a review”. THE LETTER The writer was commenting on…

CASE MANAGEMENT, NECESSITY AND EXPERTS: BA -v- SPENCER: IS EXPERT EVIDENCE "REASONABLY REQUIRED"?

August 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Case Management, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In his decision today in British Airways Plc -v- Spencer [2015] EWHC 2477 (Ch) Mr Justice Warren made important observations about the need for expert evidence.  The judge overturned a case management decision that expert evidence was not necessary and…

ASSESSING EXPERT EVIDENCE: GUIDANCE FROM VICTORIA

August 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

There are many cases where a judge has to determine differences between experts.  It is helpful for practitioners to know what factors are taken into account when assessing evidence . The Judicial College of Victoria puts all its guidance to…

EXPERT WITNESSES IN INSURANCE CASES 1: INVOLNERT MANAGEMENT

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Involnert Management Inc -v- AIS Insurance Services Limited [2015] EWHC 2225 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt considered the evidence of experts in a case between insurer and insured and, more particularly,between the insured and insurance broker. THE CASE The defendants…

THE CHIPS ARE DOWN FOR EXPERT WHO FAILED TO DECLARE AN INTEREST

July 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In The Ritz Hotel Casino Ltd -v- Al Geabury [2015] EWHC 2294(QB) Mrs Justice Simler DBE was critical of an expert who failed to declare an interest in a case. The expert had become a treating doctor. “It was no…

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST "EXPERT WITNESSES" ARE NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of the Divisional Court in Accident Exchange Ltd -v- Nathan John George-Broom & Ors [2015] EWHC 2205 (Admin) is certainly a development in the practice relating to dismissal. THE CASE The claimants applied to commit a number of…

A TRIAL WITHOUT WITNESSES: THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES: DUNNAGE -v- RANDALL

July 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Liability, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision today in Dunnage -v- Randall [2015] EWCA Civ 673 is one of those seminal cases that every tort law student will have to read.  Here we look at the case and the procedure. In particular…

APPEAL COURT CAN DECIDE ISSUES BETWEEN EXPERTS ON FOREIGN LAW: AND ANOTHER LOOK AT WITNESS STATEMENTS

June 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

 The issue of when an appeal can court take its own view on expert evidence was considered in Group Seven Limited -v- Allied Investment Corporation Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 631. The judgment at first instance also makes for informative reading…

ANOTHER UNSATISFACTORY EXPERT: WITH A WRONG VIEW OF HIS ROLE

June 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Sinclair -v- Joyner [2015] EWHC Civ 1800 (QB)  Mrs Justice Cox made some important observations about the role of the expert and the conduct of the expert instructed by the defendant in that case. THE CASE The claimant was…

CAUSATION AND EVIDENCE – A BURNING PROBLEM? IMPORTANT ISSUES FROM A BIZARRE SET OF FACTS

June 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Graves -v- Brouwer [2015] EWCA Civ 595 the Court of Appeal carried out an extensive review of the principles and authorities relating to evidence and causation.  There is a useful discussion on the role and questioning of experts at…

EXPERT REPORTS: TOO LONG AND NOT MUCH USE: CARE EXPERTS MUST TAKE MORE CARE

June 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In the case of Harman -v- East Kent Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 1662 (QB) Mr Justice Turner had some very clear criticisms of the expert reports. Some of the comments are of general importance. “Against the background of…

THE MEETING OF EXPERTS: CASE LAW AND GUIDANCE

June 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Members Content

The case of Cintas Corp No 2 -v- Rhino Developments (2015 Ch D Newey J 10/6/2015) * reported on Lawtel today provides an interesting scenario in relation to the conduct of an expert and joint meetings. There is relatively little…

APPEALING DECISIONS IN RELATION TO EXPERTS: SOME USEFUL EXAMPLES

June 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content

An earlier post commented on how rare it was for appeals to take place in relation to the instruction of experts. John McQuater of Atherton Godfrey has kindly sent me two examples of appeals on the issue of experts. (Both…

PERMISSION TO CALL EXPERT WITNESS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

May 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

I cannot recall the last time an appeal took place in relation to the question of permission to call an expert witness.  The post yesterday discussed a case where permission to call an expert was upheld.  Hot on its heels…

APPEALS AGAINST DECISION TO ALLOW EXPERT EVIDENCE: DEFENDANTS TOLD TO GET ON THEIR BIKE

May 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

Appeals against orders granting permission for parties to call expert witnesses are rare. It is worthwhile, therefore, reading the judgment of Mr Justice Green in Allen -v- Cornwall Council [2015] EWCA Civ 1461 (QB) with some care. THE CASE The…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ORDER STRIKING OUT CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO SERVE EXPERT REPORT: DON'T PARK THE LORRY WHEN THE TIDE IS AGAINST YOU

May 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Elliott -v- Stobart Group Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 449 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out an application for damages because of a failure to serve a medical report. “In my judgment Judge Platts was correct…

INTERIM PAYMENTS; SERIOUS INJURY; ACCOMMODATION AND EELES

April 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Statements of Case

The very first post on this blog was a review of the law relating to interim payments in personal injury cases after Eeles. This issue was raised against in the decision of Grainger -v- Cooper [2015] EWHC 1132 (QB). THE…

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…

LAY EVIDENCE AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: MORE IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER

March 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Wake -v- Johnson [2015] EWHC 276(QB) HH Judge Collender QC (Sitting as Judge of the High Court) conducted a critical analysis of the lay evidence and expert evidence when dismissing a clinical negligence claim against a GP.  There are…

ADJOURNMENT GRANTED WHEN MEDICAL EXPERT "UNABLE" TO ATTEND: BETTER EVIDENCE NEEDED IN FUTURE

March 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In D -v- the Secretary of State for Health [2015] EWHC 867(QB) Mr Justice Foskett granted the claimant when an important expert was unable to attend for somewhat unusual reasons. The judgment was designed to set out clear guidance for…

EXPERT EVIDENCE ABOUT THE VERACITY OF WITNESSES: WELL, IT IS PROBABLY A WASTE OF TIME

February 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Wigan Council -v- C [2015] EWFC 8 Mr Justice Peter Jackson raised considerable doubts as to whether an expert report on the potential veracity of child witnesses was of much value to a judge. It is a family case…

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….

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…

CASE MANAGEMENT, DIRECTIONS AND ATTENDANCE OF THE PARTIES: A WARNING SHOT FROM THE COMMERCIAL COURT

January 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Richardson -v- Glencore UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 3990 (Comm) Mr Justice Walker had strong words to say about any apparent casualness by the parties in preparing for, and attending, the Case Management Conference. The judgment was intended to be…

← Previous 1 … 9 10 11 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

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 88: ANOTHER CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE PLEADINGS: “THE DEFENDANTS ARE ENTITLED TO KNOW THE CASE AGAINST THEM…”
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 87: A CLAIM CAN BE STRUCK OUT ON AN ANALYSIS OF THE PLEADED CASE
  • EXPERT WATCH 64: LOOKING AT THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN EXPERT REPORTING BADLY
  • COST BITES 428 : IF THERE IS NO CHARGING CLAUSE IN THE WILL CAN THE SOLICITOR GET PAID?
  • COST BITES 427: WHEN A SOLICITOR ABANDONS AN ASSESSMENT: PERSONAL LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW

Top Posts

COST BITES 426: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK SHOULD PAY COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUING: "THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK IS DESIGNED TO BE DIFFERENT"
THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT DOCUMENTS NEED TO BE IN AN APPEAL BUNDLE? A JUDGMENT ON THAT VERY POINT:"DOCUMENTS GENUINELY REQUIRED FOR DETERMINATION OF THE APPEAL"
A PARTY CANNOT ADVANCE ONE CASE IN ONE SET OF PROCEEDINGS AND THE OPPOSITE CASE IN ANOTHER: ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT LEADS TO A COUNTERCLAIM BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
COST BITES 427: WHEN A SOLICITOR ABANDONS AN ASSESSMENT: PERSONAL LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW

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