Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Parties to actions
JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES INTO EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 1: NOTIFY THE EXISTING PARTIES: THE RULES DON'T SAY SO BUT COMMON SENSE DOES

JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES INTO EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 1: NOTIFY THE EXISTING PARTIES: THE RULES DON’T SAY SO BUT COMMON SENSE DOES

January 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Parties to actions

There are a few interesting procedural matters that flow from the decision of HHJ Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Molavi v Hibbert & Ors [2020] EWHC 121 (Ch).  Here we look at the judge’s comments on…

LITIGATION: NO DUTY TO THE OTHER SIDE IN LITIGATION TO PUT FORWARD YOUR BEST EVIDENCE

LITIGATION: NO DUTY TO THE OTHER SIDE IN LITIGATION TO PUT FORWARD YOUR BEST EVIDENCE

December 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Parties to actions, Professional negligence,

The Court of Appeal judgment this morning in  Revenue And Customs v Charles (t/a Boston Computer Group Europe) [2019] EWCA Civ 2176 contains some important observations in relation to the duties that litigating parties owe to each other.   “If…

ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF"

ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF”

November 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Parties to actions, Relief from sanctions

In ABC v Google LLC [2019] EWHC 3020 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini refused an (anonymous) claimants application for relief from sanctions.  The case has some unusual features, however it does highlight the point that a relief from sanctions application…

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

December 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Parties to actions

An earlier post dealt with the judgment in  McDermott -v- Inhealth Limited (19/07/2018) in relation to costs liability when a claimant settled against some, but not all, defendants in a clinical negligence case. That judgment was sent to me by Thomas Riis-Bristow, Associate…

SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?

SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?

November 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Parties to actions

It is always embarrassing to find out you are suing the wrong defendant and have to apply for substitution (although we have looked at cases in which the wrong claimant has issued proceedings).  This issue was considered by Mr Justice…

A CLAIMANT CAN SUE AN UNNAMED DRIVER (AND THE INSURER HAS TO PAY): COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

A CLAIMANT CAN SUE AN UNNAMED DRIVER (AND THE INSURER HAS TO PAY): COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

May 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Insurance, Judgment, Members Content, Parties to actions

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT IN Cameron v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2019] UKSC 6 t In Cameron -v- Hussain [2017] EWCA Civ 366 the Court of Appeal (by a majority) considered the question whether a claimant…

THE DEAD CAN'T SUE: AN IMPORTANT REMINDER

November 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Group Litigation Orders, Members Content, Parties to actions, Striking out, Uncategorized

In Kimathi & Ors -v- The Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2016] EWHC 3005 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart reviewed the principles in relation to bringing an action on behalf of a deceased party.  It is an important reminder of some very…

A POTENTIAL BENEFICIARY CANNOT BRING AN ACTION ON BEHALF OF AN ESTATE

January 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Parties to actions, Uncategorized

The facts in Haastrup -v- Okorie [2016] EWHC 12 (Ch) are somewhat complex. However they do bring home some important matters in relation to the need to have capacity to bring proceedings on behalf of an estate.  The judgment of…

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

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.