Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Extensions of time » Page 4

MINISTRY OF DEFENCE REFUSED EXTENSION OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER: ORDERS ARE ORDERS

November 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Eaglesham -v- Ministry of Defence [2016] EWHC 3011 (QB) Mrs Justice Andrews DBE refused the defendant’s application for an extension of time for compliance with an unless order. The Defence was struck out. “A party who faces genuine difficulties…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY, DELAY AND DENTON.

November 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is an interesting discussion of  the credibility  of witnesses in the judgment of Mr Registrar Briggs in Preston -v- Green (Liquidator of Cre8atsea Limited) [2016] EWHC 25222 (Ch). The Registrar also had to consider whether to exercise his discretion…

IF THE DEFENCE IS FILED LATE THE CLAIMANT IS STILL ENTITLED TO DEFAULT JUDGMENT: TWO POINTS TO WATCH

September 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Default judgment,, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

NB THIS DECISION HAS SINCE BEEN OVERTURNED BY A CHANGE IN THE RULES, SEE THE POST HERE. The decision of Deputy Master Pickering in Billington -v- Davies [2016] EWHC 1919 (Ch) illustrates two important principles that are often overlooked. A…

PEREMPTORY ORDERS, EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY

May 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Suez Fortune Investments Ltd -v- Talbot Underwriting Ltd [2016]  EWHC 1085 (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux considered an application to extend time or vary a peremptory order. “I consider that a claimant in contumelious breach of Court Orders whose claim…

EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF A CLAIM FORM: PROSECCO MAY HELP

May 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Insolvency, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

There have been numerous cases relating to extension of the claim form on this blog. I can’t remember one which ended well for the claimant.  However the claimant was successful in the Instone -v- Prosecco (Leeds) LImited [2016] EW Misc…

LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF APPEAL: COUNSEL'S ERROR DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A GOOD REASON

May 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Turner -v- South Cambridgeshire District Council [2016] EWHC 1017(Admin)Mr Justice Warby considered the Denton guidance in relation to an application to appeal out of time. Among other factors he rejected the idea that an error…

"IN TIME" APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PEREMPTORY ORDER REFUSED: CLAIM STRUCK OUT

April 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Charles Bagot of Hardwicke Chambers for bringing my attention to the decision in Kranniqi -v- Watford Timber Company Ltd (District Judge Parfitt 13/04/2016). It is a working example of (i)the dangers of failing to comply with…

DENTON DOES NOT APPLY TO DELAY IN PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT

March 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Simon Anderson of Park Square Barristers for his note of the judgment of Deputy District Judge Hill yesterday (4th March 2016) in the case of Martin -v- The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. This decision is…

THERE IS NO SPECIAL RULE FOR PUBLIC AUTHORITIES: SECRETARY OF STATE NOT GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL OUT OF TIME

March 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The previous post emphasised the point that state agencies have no preferred status when it comes to compliance with rules and relief from sanctions. This point was made clear again by the Court of Appeal judgment in The Secretary of…

EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A RISKY BUSINESS

January 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In Medhi Kohsravi -v- British American Tobacco PLC [2016] EWHC 123 (QB)Sir David Eady stated that he would have set aside an order extending time for service of the claim form. It is a timely warning that obtaining an extension…

← Previous 1 … 3 4

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...
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

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