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

DELAY AND NON-COMPLIANCE: ACTION STRUCK OUT: A "GAME CHANGER"

January 4, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Uncategorized

The judgment of Master Matthew in Phelps -v- Button [2016] EWHC 3185 (Ch) emphasises the dangers of delay and non compliance. “…I will observe that the Court ethos has changed enormously since the days of Lord Denning and the two…

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…

HOURLY RATES, SUCCESS FEES, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS – ALL IN ONE CASE

November 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

There is a great deal of material covered in the judgment of Master Gordon-Saker in Various Claimants -v- MGN Limited [2016] EWHC B29 (Costs). THE CASE The court was determining various preliminary issues in relation to costs in the “phone…

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…

HIGH COURT OVERTURNS DECISION TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: NON-COMPLIANCE CANNOT AMOUNT TO "GOOD REASON"

October 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Security for Costs, Uncategorized

  In Pittville Ltd -v- Hunters & Frankau Limited [2016] EWHC 2683 Mr Justice Snowden overturned the decision of a Deputy Master granting relief from sanctions.   The judgment contains an important consideration of the question of “good reasons” for…

NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET FILED LATE: THE DECISION IN DETAIL

October 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Useful links

We have looked, briefly, at the Court of Appeal decision in Jamadar -v- Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust [2016] EWCA Civ 1001. I am grateful to Aaron Vodden   of  Hempsons for sending me a copy of the transcript which…

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…

DELAY AND SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: BALD ASSERTIONS IN AN EXPERT'S REPORT

August 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

The result in Gahir -v- Bansal [2016] EWHC 2041 (QB) (Sir David Eady) is perhaps surprising given the strength of the judge’s observations as to the defendant’s conduct. Despite major unjustified delay an application to set aside a default judgment…

FAILING TO FILE A COST BUDGET AND REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A HARSH LESSON

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Clinical Negligence, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

If a litigation solicitor is ever given the job of designing wallpaper here are the three key things that should form the recurring motif. The costs budget is due 21 days before the first case management conference. Where the claim…

COSTS BUDGETING – THE KEY DATES: A QUICK REMINDER TO AVOID A SHARP (BUT NOT NECESSARILY SHORT) SHOCK

July 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Uncategorized

You would think that everyone involved in litigation would know that new rules as to cost budgeting came into force on the 6th April 2016. However, judging from some of the blank (and worried) looks I have seen recently when…

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM NOT SET ASIDE - AN OBJECT LESSON IN STAYING AWAKE IN LITIGATION

DEFAULT JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM NOT SET ASIDE – AN OBJECT LESSON IN STAYING AWAKE IN LITIGATION

June 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The decision of Master Matthews today in Goldcrest Distribution Ltd -v- McCole [2016] EWHC 1571 (Ch) provides an object lesson in the need to stay awake to procedural issues throughout litigation. The claimant had a default judgment on a counterclaim…

PROVING THINGS 23: SERVING IMPORTANT EVIDENCE LATE

June 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

It is surprising how many posts there are on this blog which deal with the late service of witness evidence.  This is an issue that occurs across the whole spectrum of civil procedure.  The question arose again in the judgment…

CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON WITNESS EVIDENCE SERVED DURING TRIAL

June 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

Yesterday I looked at a case where a defendant was refused permission to rely upon a witness statement served late,96 although it was served before trial. Today we look at a case where a claimant was given permission to rely…

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO ADDUCE FURTHER EVIDENCE: LATE EVIDENCE IS ALWAYS A PROBLEM

June 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Uncategorized, Witness statements

  I am grateful to barrister Michelle Fanneran for sending me a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Cotter QC in the case of Moore -v- Plymouth Hospitals Trust (11th May 2016).  This involves consideration of relief from…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURN REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: RE-TRIAL NECESSARY

May 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In McTear -v- Engelhard [2016] EWCA Civ 487 today the Court of Appeal overturned a refusal to grant relief from sanctions.  Consequently there will have to be a re-trial. (The judgment at first instance in this Case was considered in…

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…

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…

TAKING TECHNICAL POINTS AS TO SERVICE: JUDICIAL "DISMAY" THAT THE MATTER WAS PURSUED

April 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

One of the most difficult decisions that litigators now face is whether to take “technical points”. Technical points, particularly as to service of the claim form, can potentially bring proceedings to a premature end. However there are risks as well…

"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…

IN-HOUSE COURSES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE

IN-HOUSE COURSES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE

April 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In response to several e-mails over recent months I have prepared two courses, available in-house only: one on drafting witness statements, the other on “avoiding procedural pitfalls”. WITNESS STATEMENTS “Too often (indeed far too often) witnesses who have had statements…

COSTS BUDGET SERVED LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED ON APPEAL

April 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In a judgment given today His Honour Judge Peter Gregory allowed an appeal against a decision to confine a claimant’s costs budget to court fees following late service of the costs budget. The case indicates that a more nuanced approach…

LITIGATION AND WORKLOAD 3: INSURERS

LITIGATION AND WORKLOAD 3: INSURERS

March 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Interim Payments, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The first post in this series on litigators and workload got an (unexpected) amount of attention.  As part of the series I want to look at one often overlooked, but crucial, part of the litigation chain, insurers. In particular claims…

BRITISH GAS HAS PRODUCED SOME HOT AIR: DENTON APPLIED NOT CONVERTED

March 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

I have already seen several headlines, and numerous commentaries, that mention the “hard line” taken by the Court of Appeal in British Gas Trading -v- Oak Cash & Carry Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 153.  The case is not as draconian as…

DENTON AND DELAY IN APPLYING FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE PRINCIPLES CANNOT BE CASH AND CARRIED AWAY

March 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in British Gas Trading -v- Oak Cash & Carry Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 153 reiterates the significance of the Denton principles. It also emphasises the importance of applying for relief from sanctions promptly….

DELAY, DISCRETION AND SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT

March 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Albesher -v- Ryan [2016] EWHC 541 (Comm) Mr Justice Walker considered issues of delay in an application to set aside a default judgment.   KEY POINTS A regular judgment was set aside because there was…

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…

A "DISTURBING" APPROACH TO COMPLIANCE: STATE AGENCIES HAVE NO PREFERRED STATUS

March 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in BPP Holdings -v- The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2016] EWCA Civ 121, contains some observations in relation to compliance that are of general relevance.  Not least everyone litigating on…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, "MATERIALITY" & CONSIDERING THE MERITS IN A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL OF RELIEF ALLOWED

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

In Joshi & Welch Limited -v- Tay Foods [2015] EWHC 3905 (QB) Mr Justice Green allowed an appeal where the judge a first instance refused to grant relief from sanctions.  Much centred on the definition of the word “material”.  The…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

It is now just over 18 months since the Denton decision. Cases in relation to relief from sanction are still being reported regularly.  It is clear that default remains a problem and an issue within the civil courts. Further it…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: NO PERMISSION TO SERVE RESPONDENT'S NOTICE LATE

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Pipe -v- Spicerhaart Estate Agents Ltd [2016] EWHC 61 QB Mr Justice Sweeney refused permission to serve a Respondent’s notice late. “Against the background that this is a small claims case, the conduct of the Respondent in relation to…

DECISION NOT TO ADMIT LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the decision in Judges Sykes Frixous -v- Bhabra (CA 14/010/2016).*  This provides another example of a party (unsuccessfully) trying to serve witness evidence late in the day.  There are numerous posts on…

NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AFTER BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Security for Costs, Uncategorized

In Sinclair -V- Dorsey & Whitney (Europe) LLP [2015] EWHC 3888 (Comm) Mr Justice refused an application from relief from sanctions. (I am grateful to Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd for sending me a copy of the transcript). “The starting point is…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, FRAUD AND THE CHANGING SITUATION

January 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

I must preface this post with the warning that it is not possible to cite decisions relating to  permission to appeal.  However the decision in Bawden -v- WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC [2015] EWCA Civ 957 is interesting in itself. The…

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…

SUPREME SANCTIONS IN THE SUPREME COURT: NO SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY

December 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of the Supreme Court in Thevarajah -v- Riordan [2015] UKSC 78 has been long anticipated since it related to the law relating to sanctions. In fact it is a decision in relation to a very narrow issues.  The…

WAITING FOR LEGAL AID IS NOT A GOOD REASON FOR DELAY: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

December 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In R (Kigen) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1286 the Court of Appeal stated that delay caused by waiting for the Legal Aid Agency may no longer be accepted as a good reason for…

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…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED IN £30 MILLION CASE: NOT ALL SANCTIONS ARE EQUAL

November 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Sinclair -v- Dorsey & Whitney (Mr Justice Popplewell 20/11/2015)* an application for relief from sanctions was refused in a case that the claimant valued at £30 million. THE CASE The claimants had been ordered to provide security for costs….

WHEN TWO RULES COLLIDE:PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT OVERRIDE NEED TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM

November 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Part 36, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In The Former Owners of the Motor Vessel “Melissa K” -v- The Former Owners of the Motor Tanker “Tomsk” [2015] EWHC 3445 (Admlty) Mr Justice Males considered the interplay between Part 36 and the need to serve. It is an…

DENTON: EXTENSIONS OF TIME AND COSTS: OPPOSITION TO APPLICATIONS IS NOT ALWAYS UNREASONABLE

November 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In The Queen on the Application of IDIRA -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1187 the Court of Appeal made a number of observations in relation to extensions of time, the Denton criteria, and…

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…

COSTS AFTER RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT

November 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

An earlier post looked at the decision of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in North Midland Construction plc -v- Geo Networks Ltd [2015] 2384 (TCC).  Here we look at the subsequent order in relation to costs. THE CASE The claimant failed to…

DENTON, DELAY AND THE COURT OF APPEAL: OUT OF TIME APPEAL REFUSED

November 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal considered the Denton criteria in JA (Ghana) -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1031. A decision that emphasises that the criteria can be applied rigorously. “A more appropriate and (individually)…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO ALLOW APPEAL WHERE RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURE TO GIVE TIMEOUS NOTICE OF FUNDING

October 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In its judgment today in  Mischon De Reya -v- Caliendo [2015] EWCA Civ 1029 the Court of Appeal refused the Defendant’s appeal where a claimant had been granted relief from sanctions following a failure to give proper notice of funding….

WITNESS STATEMENTS & SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

We looked in an earlier post at the case of Ali -v- CIS General Insurance (29/7/2015) where a claimant’s action was struck out because of failure to give disclosure. However there was a passing comment in the judgment  which demonstrated…

SERVED A COPY CLAIM FORM BY MISTAKE? THERE MAY BE A WAY OUT: BUT BE CAREFUL

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In United Utilities Group PLC -v- Hart (HH Judge Wood, Liverpool County Court, 24th September 2015*) a claimant was granted a “reprieve” after having served a photocopy of the claim form by mistake.  However this is another one of those…

THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE LIMITATION ACT: DELAY WHEN APPLYING TO SET JUDGMENT ASIDE

October 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Judgment, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Blakemores LDP -v- Scott [2015] EWCA Civ 999 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to date of knowledge for the purpose of  s.14A of the Limitation Act 1980 . The court also considered the impact of delay when…

CASE STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO GIVE DISCLOSURE IN RELATION TO LATER ACCIDENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

October 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Uncategorized

In Ali -v- CIS General Insurance 2015 WL 5037781 His Honour Judge Cryan upheld a decision striking out a claim for failure to comply with disclosure. “The failure to comply with the order for disclosure was a serious failure to…

← Previous 1 … 9 10 11 … 16 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

  • WEBINAR ON PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: 9th SEPTEMBER 2026: USEFUL GUIDANCE, CHECKLISTS AND QUESTIONNAIRES
  • SHOULD (OR CAN) THE COURT MAKE AN ORDER FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE WHEN THE PROPOSED DEFENDANT IS BASED IN ITALY? ANOTHER PAD APPLICATION COMES TO GRIEF…
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY:”WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THINGS GO WRONG BLAME THE SOLICITOR” (SEPTEMBER 2016)
  • SHOULD THE COURT ORDER PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE? THE JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENTS ARE NOT SATISFIED AND THE COURT WOULD NOT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN ANY EVENT
  • COST BITES 446 : SHOULD THE COURT HAVE MADE A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER? SHOULD THE APPELLANT HAVE BEEN CROSS-EXAMINED AND WAS THE COURT BOUND TO ACCEPT HIS EVIDENCE?

Top Posts

SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT, DENTON AND DELAY: SHOULD THE COURT REFUSE THE DEFENDANT RELIEF BECAUSE THEY HAD CAUSED UNNECESSARY DELAY AND COSTS?
DEALING WITH FISH FILES, PROCRASTINATION AND DELAY: THE LITIGATOR'S FRIEND: A REMINDER OF USEFUL LINKS, POSTS AND GUIDANCE AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: "BACKDATING LETTERS" TO DELIBERATELY MISLEAD COULD COST YOU: £4.58 MILLION IN THIS CASE: (METADATA COMES INTO PLAY NOW)
COST BITES 443: USEFUL CHECKLISTS: A CHECKLIST ON COSTS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR CASES (FOR CLAIMANTS)
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW SERIES 4: A RECAP OF THE PREVIOUS SERIES AND THE DEADLY SINS OF ADVOCATES: DON'T BE CONFUSING OR BORING

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.