Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Members Content
EXPERT WATCH 31: A PARTY WAS NOT ALLOWED TO RELY ON THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF SOMEONE WHO WAS CONFLICTED: THE EXPERT CANNOT "MARK THEIR OWN HOMEWORK"

EXPERT WATCH 31: A PARTY WAS NOT ALLOWED TO RELY ON THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF SOMEONE WHO WAS CONFLICTED: THE EXPERT CANNOT “MARK THEIR OWN HOMEWORK”

January 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

This is an interesting example of a judge refusing a party permission to rely on an expert witness because they were conflicted.  They had been involved in the issues previously and could not give independent or disinterested advice.   “Ms…

COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR'S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION

COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR’S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION

January 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There are many lessons to learn from this case: (i) the nature, extent and power of the Legal Ombudsman; (ii) the importance of transparency and accuracy when giving an estimate as to fees, particularly in litigation (iii) the very limited…

COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT'S HAD AN "ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION"

COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT’S HAD AN “ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION”

January 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We have looked many times at cases where the courts have considered whether or not costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis.  I do not recall a judgment where the judge has decided this issue so emphatically.   There were…

IT IS NOT THE JUDGE'S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED

IT IS NOT THE JUDGE’S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED

January 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

There are a remarkable number of cases about penal notices.  Questions such as “are they part of the court order?”; “are the essential for committal proceedings to be brought?” “when should they be added and who should add them” arise…

COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE "SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES" UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT

COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES” UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

A client has a limited amount of time to challenge a solicitor’s bill.   If the bill is challenged 12 months after delivery or payment then the power to order assessment can only be exercised if the court accepts that there…

PROVING THINGS 276: APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE'S "INFERENCES" OF LOSS: DAMAGES AWARD OF £347,285 REPLACED WITH £NIL

PROVING THINGS 276: APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE’S “INFERENCES” OF LOSS: DAMAGES AWARD OF £347,285 REPLACED WITH £NIL

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

This is a classic “Proving Things” case, the only surprise being that it reached the appeal stage.   On appeal the the judge overturned the trial judge’s findings in favour of the defendant’s counterclaim and reduced a damages award of £347,285…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON'T HAVE THEM

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON’T HAVE THEM

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The next webinar in the “Avoiding the Pitfalls” series is a 9o minute long webinar on the 6th February 2026.  The webinar examines the most common procedural problems and practical difficulties that arise in civil litigation.  It explores where and…

MAZUR MATTERS 47: MAZUR CITED IN SUBMISSIONS FOR APPLICATION TO ADJOURN: "THIS IS NOT RELEVANT"

MAZUR MATTERS 47: MAZUR CITED IN SUBMISSIONS FOR APPLICATION TO ADJOURN: “THIS IS NOT RELEVANT”

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Mazur has not featured in many reported cases.  However it is mentioned in passing here. For the sake of completeness of the series I have included it.  It is (I suspect not the first) where it appears to have been…

BEWARE OF FALSE (OR AT LEAST MISLEADING) DOCUMENTS WITH "COURT SEALS": "CLUMSY ATTEMPTS WHICH COULD MISLEAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC..."

BEWARE OF FALSE (OR AT LEAST MISLEADING) DOCUMENTS WITH “COURT SEALS”: “CLUMSY ATTEMPTS WHICH COULD MISLEAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC…”

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We have seen a few occasions where someone has produced an “official” court document which turned out to be no such thing.  We see another example here, a “warrant” that, on the face of  it had a red circular seal…

COST BITES 336: MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" AND DO NOT JUSTIFY A VARIATION IN THE BUDGET: THE JUDGE NOT PERSUADED ON THE USE OF LEADING COUNSEL, NEW SOLICITORS WITH HIGHER HOURLY RATES AND THINGS MISSED FROM THE FIRST BUDGET

COST BITES 336: MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” AND DO NOT JUSTIFY A VARIATION IN THE BUDGET: THE JUDGE NOT PERSUADED ON THE USE OF LEADING COUNSEL, NEW SOLICITORS WITH HIGHER HOURLY RATES AND THINGS MISSED FROM THE FIRST BUDGET

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Here we have a detailed analysis of a defendant’s application to vary (that is more than double) its original costs budget.  At the PTR stage the defendant applied to double its costs budget, some of this was allowed, most was…

ONE OF THE PERILS OF OBTAINING AN INJUNCTION: AN INTERVENER GIVEN LIBERTY TO APPLY TO BRING A POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY AN INJUNCTION: LITIGATORS MUST GIVE CAREFUL ADVICE...

ONE OF THE PERILS OF OBTAINING AN INJUNCTION: AN INTERVENER GIVEN LIBERTY TO APPLY TO BRING A POTENTIAL CLAIM FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY AN INJUNCTION: LITIGATORS MUST GIVE CAREFUL ADVICE…

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Injunctions, Members Content

A party seeking an injunction is usually required to give an undertaking as to damages. That undertaking normally extends to the defendants/respondents to the injunction. However the terms of the injunction often give third parties affected by the injunction a…

SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A "FORMIDABLE BURDEN"

SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A “FORMIDABLE BURDEN”

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Witness statements

A litigant who fails to beat a Part 36 offer can normally expect to face the consequences set out in the rules.  There is an exception if that litigant can satisfy the court that it is “unjust” for those consequences…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A "NON-ADMISSION" AND A DENIAL: IF YOU DENY - YOU HAVE TO SAY WHY...

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A DENIAL: IF YOU DENY – YOU HAVE TO SAY WHY…

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Some defences adopt a scattergun approach of “denying” everything.  Some are more selective – they “put the Claimant to strict proof”.  Many defences ignore the important distinction between a non-admission and a denial.   It is important that practitioners know the…

PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF "21 DAYS" ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES...

PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF “21 DAYS” ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES…

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We have seen numerous cases on this blog where matters have been left the “last minute” and the rules as to the calculation of time become important.  Here we have an interesting example in relation to Part 36.  An offer…

COST BITES 335: DID FIXED COSTS APPLY? THE EXCEPTIONS, THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND THE EFFECT OF PART 36 CONSIDERED

COST BITES 335: DID FIXED COSTS APPLY? THE EXCEPTIONS, THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND THE EFFECT OF PART 36 CONSIDERED

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Aofie Murphy from Brabners for sending me a copy of this judgment this morning. It relates to fixed costs (i) the exceptions; (ii) the transitional provisions; (iii) whether a Part 36 offer displaced them.  It has…

THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR - CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE

THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR – CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

Here we are looking at a case that bristles with issues both in relation to solicitor and own client costs, but also in relation to civil procedure and compliance with court orders. It serves as a reminder that a client…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON'T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT (FROM JANUARY 2018)

THROWBACK FRIDAY: WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT (FROM JANUARY 2018)

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Today we go back to a post from January 2018 on a point that remains just as relevant today.   There is a mandatory requirement that a witness give the source of their information and belief.  A surprising number of witness…

SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIFIC ISSUES: WHEN SHOULD A  "COMPELLING REASON" PREVENT JUDGMENT BEING GIVEN? (NOT HERE...)

SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIFIC ISSUES: WHEN SHOULD A “COMPELLING REASON” PREVENT JUDGMENT BEING GIVEN? (NOT HERE…)

January 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case, Summary judgment

One ground for resisting an application for summary judgment is that there is a “compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at trial”.  It is unusual for the issue of a “compelling reason” to be considered,…

WHEN DOCUMENTS WERE CHANGED AFTER THE EVENT: "THEY ARE FALSE AND WERE INTENDED TO DEFLECT BLAME": SOME POINTS FOR LITIGATORS TO REMEMBER IF THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR CASES ON AN EVEN KEEL...

WHEN DOCUMENTS WERE CHANGED AFTER THE EVENT: “THEY ARE FALSE AND WERE INTENDED TO DEFLECT BLAME”: SOME POINTS FOR LITIGATORS TO REMEMBER IF THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR CASES ON AN EVEN KEEL…

January 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Many the cases which consider and give guidance on witness credibility stress the importance of contemporary documents.  However what happens when the “contemporary” documents have been re-written after the event?  Litigations should be alive to that possibility. Here we look…

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE "MAN OF STRAW" IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT'S HOME INSURANCE

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE

January 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Enforcement, Members Content, Personal Injury

A perennial problem for litigators is the situation where a claimant has a good case but the Defendant is impecunious and uninsured.  In many (but not all) motor claims the Motor Insurers Bureau will provide a practical remedy. In all…

COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE PART IN THE HEARING SO WHY SHOULD THE APPLICATION BE GRANTED?

January 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This case illustrates an important point about procedure in Part 8 proceedings. In particular the fact that a defendant who fails to acknowledge service has no right to be heard at any subsequent hearing.  Here the defendant’s application for an…

COST BITES 334: CAN A CLAIMANT OBTAIN INTEREST ON COSTS EVEN WHEN COSTS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID BECAUSE THE MATTER IS FUNDED BY USING A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT?

COST BITES 334: CAN A CLAIMANT OBTAIN INTEREST ON COSTS EVEN WHEN COSTS HAVE NOT BEEN PAID BECAUSE THE MATTER IS FUNDED BY USING A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT?

January 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Interest, Members Content

This case considers an interesting question as to costs.  Should the court award the claimants interest on costs where, in fact, they have not incurred any costs because the matter is being conducted by using a CFA?   “As a…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A ROBUST OVERTURNING OF THE APPROACH TO THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT FIRST INSTANCE: "GENERALISED FINDINGS ON CREDIBILITY ARE NOT A USEFUL TOOL FOR RESOLVING SPECIFIC ISSUES OF FACT"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A ROBUST OVERTURNING OF THE APPROACH TO THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT FIRST INSTANCE: “GENERALISED FINDINGS ON CREDIBILITY ARE NOT A USEFUL TOOL FOR RESOLVING SPECIFIC ISSUES OF FACT”

January 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

It is unusual to see an appellate court make robust criticisms of the fact finding process at first instance. We have such a judgment here by the Employment Appeal Tribunal.  The EAT made it clear that generalised findings as to…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 50: A CHANGE OF COUNSEL IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO PERMIT AMENDED PLEADINGS(AKA WHY FAMILY LAWYERS NEED TO READ THIS SERIES...)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 50: A CHANGE OF COUNSEL IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO PERMIT AMENDED PLEADINGS(AKA WHY FAMILY LAWYERS NEED TO READ THIS SERIES…)

January 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

I cannot recall dealing with a case in this series which involved the Family Courts. However we have a detailed exposition and consideration of the relevant principles relating to late amendment here. One factor is the absence of a good…

COST BITES 333: REMEMBER THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT DETAILED ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE AT THE END OF PROCEEDINGS, NOT AFTER THE TRIAL OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE

COST BITES 333: REMEMBER THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT DETAILED ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE AT THE END OF PROCEEDINGS, NOT AFTER THE TRIAL OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

We are returning to a point that can easily be overlooked by a party that has been successful at a split trial or a trial of a preliminary issue. Although the court may make an order in that party’s favour,…

COST BITES 332 : COURT MAKES AN ORDER FOR  INTERIM PAYMENT OF COSTS OF £43 MILLION - AND THIS IS AFTER TAKING A "CAUTIOUS APPROACH" TO THE CLAIMANTS' EVIDENCE

COST BITES 332 : COURT MAKES AN ORDER FOR INTERIM PAYMENT OF COSTS OF £43 MILLION – AND THIS IS AFTER TAKING A “CAUTIOUS APPROACH” TO THE CLAIMANTS’ EVIDENCE

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

This judgment given today contains a number of important points in relation to costs. The headline point is obviously an interim award of £43 million was made. This was actually less than 50% of the sum being sought.  One of…

COST BITES 331: SOLICITOR FAILS TO SHOW THEY WERE OWED £573,529 IN COSTS: NEITHER A LIEN OR THE LEGAL AID CHARGE NECESSARILY GIVES RISE TO A DEBT FROM THE CLIENT

COST BITES 331: SOLICITOR FAILS TO SHOW THEY WERE OWED £573,529 IN COSTS: NEITHER A LIEN OR THE LEGAL AID CHARGE NECESSARILY GIVES RISE TO A DEBT FROM THE CLIENT

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This is an unusual case where a third party challenged a solicitor’s right to be a creditor in an insolvency arrangement. The third party argued  that the sums claimed by the solicitors were not in fact recoverable from the respondent. …

COST BITES: 330 THE ABSENCE OF A COSTS SCHEDULE DOES NOT MEAN THAT A SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT IS GOING TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS

COST BITES: 330 THE ABSENCE OF A COSTS SCHEDULE DOES NOT MEAN THAT A SUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT IS GOING TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we have an interesting issue about whether the successful respondent to an appeal should be deprived of their costs because a costs schedule had not been filed.  The appellant’s alternative argument was that the respondent should be ordered to…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER...)

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER…)

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The first time I wrote on this topic many practitioners expressed surprise that I had written something so very “basic”.  Some readers were incredulous. However, as we see below, others shared their experiences.  This rule is not known, or not…

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE?  PLUS - THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS...

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE? PLUS – THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS…

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Earlier posts have shown that the claimant was successful on two of the key issues in relation to the appeal.  However litigation can be cruel. A litigant can win on many issues but still lose the case. So it is…

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 2: WAS AN OFFER ON LIABILITY EFFECTIVE IN THIS CONTEXT?

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 2: WAS AN OFFER ON LIABILITY EFFECTIVE IN THIS CONTEXT?

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We continue with the detailed examination of the Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 this morning.  This aspect of the case is particularly important because, again, although the claimant lost the appeal he won on this particular issue. That…

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER (1): WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A "JUDGMENT" AND AN "ORDER" ?

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER (1): WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “JUDGMENT” AND AN “ORDER” ?

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

There are some interesting issues raised in the Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 today that every practitioner should be aware of.  The case has been helpfully summarised by my colleague Elliot Kay here.   I wanted to break down…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 THIS MORNING: AN OFFER OF 90% ON LIABILITY COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE PART 36 CONSEQUENCES WHEN A CLAIM IS APPROVED ON DAMAGES (BUT DID NOT IN THIS CASE).

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 THIS MORNING: AN OFFER OF 90% ON LIABILITY COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE PART 36 CONSEQUENCES WHEN A CLAIM IS APPROVED ON DAMAGES (BUT DID NOT IN THIS CASE).

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to my colleague  Elliot Kay for sending me a note of a Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 given this morning. The issue relates to Part 36 offers on liability where the matter is compromised and…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ALWAYS WAS (AND REMAINS) A RISKY BUSINESS

THROWBACK FRIDAY: EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ALWAYS WAS (AND REMAINS) A RISKY BUSINESS

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This week we go back to January 2016. It is a post about the dangers of applying for extensions of time to serve the claim form.  The points made a decade ago remain equally valid today. We saw several cases…

COST BITES 329: THE COURT'S APPROACH TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON COSTS THAT ARISE FROM APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR "OVERSPENDS" - COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

COST BITES 329: THE COURT’S APPROACH TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON COSTS THAT ARISE FROM APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR “OVERSPENDS” – COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content

Some of the basic principles upon which the courts make orders for interim payments are well established, particularly when the case has been budgeted.  This case considers the appropriate approach when there is a claim for costs arising from interlocutory…

COST BITES 328: A CAREFULLY NUANCED DECISION ABOUT LIABILITY FOR COSTS, INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS, INCLUDING COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

COST BITES 328: A CAREFULLY NUANCED DECISION ABOUT LIABILITY FOR COSTS, INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS, INCLUDING COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The question of “who won” is usually the starting point of assessing liability to pay costs.  Complications arise when one party “won a bit”  but not all it was seeking. We have a detailed consideration of these issues here. (Whether…

COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED "AGGRESSIVELY" - COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED

COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED “AGGRESSIVELY” – COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we have the defendant making a justified, and successful, application to strike out a Reply. However the judge was unhappy with the manner in which the application (and the litigation generally) was being conduced (by both sides). He found…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 49: THE COURT STRIKES OUT TWO HUNDRED PARAGRAPHS OF A REPLY

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 49: THE COURT STRIKES OUT TWO HUNDRED PARAGRAPHS OF A REPLY

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

We are looking at a case that has many procedural points of interest to litigators.  We are starting by looking at the judge’s observations on the claimants’ Reply which was described as “Defective” and large parts struck out.  There are…

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: "THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH"

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: “THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH”

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we see another litigant coming to grief because of a failure to file a costs budget on time.  The litigant had been warned of the consequences and the judge found that there was no good reason for the breach. …

PROVIDING LEGAL SUBMISSIONS WITH INACCURATE CASE SUMMARIES: THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO WOULD "NEITHER CONFIRM OR DENY" THAT AI WAS USED

PROVIDING LEGAL SUBMISSIONS WITH INACCURATE CASE SUMMARIES: THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO WOULD “NEITHER CONFIRM OR DENY” THAT AI WAS USED

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

We are returning to the vexed issue of the (mis) use of Artificial Intelligence when providing written submissions to the court (in the case the First Tier Tribunal).  The judge found that summaries provided were inaccurate.    The judgment points…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR THIRD PARTIES AT COURT: NO NOTICE NECESSARY...

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR THIRD PARTIES AT COURT: NO NOTICE NECESSARY…

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Is a third party, with no relationship to the case, entitled to see the witness statements being used in the hearing? That is the issue considered in this case which, unusually, was an application for judicial review of a County…

CLAIMS AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEATHS ARISING FROM COVID WERE STRUCK OUT: CAUSATION COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED

CLAIMS AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEATHS ARISING FROM COVID WERE STRUCK OUT: CAUSATION COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

In this case, decided yesterday,  the court struck out the claimants’ case alleging that deaths were caused by, or materially contributed to, by the negligence of the defendant. The court had the important caveats in relation to the striking out…

COST BITES 326: DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL IN  OBTAINING A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER: FARES FAIR IN THE BUS STATION CASE...

COST BITES 326: DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL IN OBTAINING A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER: FARES FAIR IN THE BUS STATION CASE…

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This judgment today is an interesting illustration of the fact that those providing support to a party can find themselves the subject of a non-party costs order. In this case the claimant company was in liquidation. The respondents to the…

AN APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE:  THIS IS NOT A "FISHING EXPEDITION" AND IT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO MAKE AN ORDER

AN APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: THIS IS NOT A “FISHING EXPEDITION” AND IT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO MAKE AN ORDER

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

It is rare to see a fully reasoned judgment from the High Court in relation to an application for pre-action disclosure.  Here we have a case where the rules and principles were considered an applied.  There are some important lessons…

INTEREST RATE DECREASED ON THE COURT FUNDS OFFICE SPECIAL AND BASIC ACCOUNTS: THE AMOUNTS AND A REMINDER OF A USEFUL ONLINE TOOL

INTEREST RATE DECREASED ON THE COURT FUNDS OFFICE SPECIAL AND BASIC ACCOUNTS: THE AMOUNTS AND A REMINDER OF A USEFUL ONLINE TOOL

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Interest, Members Content, Personal Injury

The interest rates payable on Court Fund accounts have decreased. THE CHANGES The changes are announced here. They took effect on the 9th January 2026.   Special Account – decreased from 4.00% to 3.75% Basic Account – decreased from 3.00%…

ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE ISSUES OF OWNERSHIP WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE SAME ARGUMENT RAN TWICE (UNSUCCESSFULLY ON BOTH OCCASIONS...)

ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE ISSUES OF OWNERSHIP WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE SAME ARGUMENT RAN TWICE (UNSUCCESSFULLY ON BOTH OCCASIONS…)

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we consider an argument that it was an abuse of process for a litigant to argue issues that were directly related to another action between the parties that had been stayed.  The judge held that this was not an…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 47: YOU CAN'T CRITICISE A JUDGE FOR NOT FINDING ON A CASE THAT WAS NOT PLEADED (AND ON ANOTHER ISSUE WHERE THE CLAIMANT EXPRESSLY DISAVOWED THE CLAIM NOW BEING MADE ON APPEAL)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 47: YOU CAN’T CRITICISE A JUDGE FOR NOT FINDING ON A CASE THAT WAS NOT PLEADED (AND ON ANOTHER ISSUE WHERE THE CLAIMANT EXPRESSLY DISAVOWED THE CLAIM NOW BEING MADE ON APPEAL)

January 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we are looking at an unusual appeal.  The appellant argued firstly that the judge should have found for them on a point that was not pleaded.  A second argument was that the judge should have assessed loss on a…

WAS THIS "SECOND" ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

WAS THIS “SECOND” ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

January 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

When a party is dissatisfied with the result of a hearing and has exhausted the appeal process there is often little they can do.  One potential remedy is to bring a second action seeking to set aside the first on…

COST BITES 325:  DOES THE FACT THAT THERE WOULD BE COMPLEX ISSUES ON DETAILED ASSESSMENT MEANT THE COURT SHOULD NOT MAKE AN ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF COSTS ON ACCOUNT?

COST BITES 325: DOES THE FACT THAT THERE WOULD BE COMPLEX ISSUES ON DETAILED ASSESSMENT MEANT THE COURT SHOULD NOT MAKE AN ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF COSTS ON ACCOUNT?

January 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

The rules, and often the courts, are keen to encourage payments on account of costs. They have advantages to both parties. The receiving party receives a large percentage of costs promptly, the paying party reduces the amount of interest that…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SERVICE ON AN INDIVIDUAL USING S.1140 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SERVICE ON AN INDIVIDUAL USING S.1140 OF THE COMPANIES ACT 2006

January 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This post reminds claimants that service  can take place under s.1140 of the Companies Act on an individual in their capacity as an individual.  It also serves as a reminder to defendants, and anyone who is a company director that…

1 2 … 134 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXPERT WATCH 31: A PARTY WAS NOT ALLOWED TO RELY ON THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF SOMEONE WHO WAS CONFLICTED: THE EXPERT CANNOT “MARK THEIR OWN HOMEWORK”
  • COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR’S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION
  • COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT’S HAD AN “ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION”
  • IT IS NOT THE JUDGE’S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED
  • COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES” UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT

Top Posts

  • MAZUR MATTERS 47: MAZUR CITED IN SUBMISSIONS FOR APPLICATION TO ADJOURN: "THIS IS NOT RELEVANT"
  • PROVING THINGS 276: APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE'S "INFERENCES" OF LOSS: DAMAGES AWARD OF £347,285 REPLACED WITH £NIL
  • BEWARE OF FALSE (OR AT LEAST MISLEADING) DOCUMENTS WITH "COURT SEALS": "CLUMSY ATTEMPTS WHICH COULD MISLEAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC..."
  • COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT'S HAD AN "ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION"
  • COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE "SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES" UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT

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.