Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Schedules
A SERIES OF WEBINARS ON "STAYING SAFE" IN PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE: BRIGHTEN UP YOUR NEW YEAR

A SERIES OF WEBINARS ON “STAYING SAFE” IN PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE: BRIGHTEN UP YOUR NEW YEAR

December 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Personal Injury, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Schedules, Well being, Witness statements

To help 2021 run smoothly  for  litigators I am presenting a series of webinars in February and March on the theme of “staying safe” in the running of personal injury cases. The webinars look at key areas of practice and…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 54: SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES SHOULD NOT BE WORKS OF FICTION

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 54: SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES SHOULD NOT BE WORKS OF FICTION

July 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Schedules, Statements of Case

Anyone drafting anything in the litigation process must remain acutely aware that there is real possibility that the document they are drafting will one day be read by a judge.  This is even more likely in relation to a schedule…

CLAIMANTS WERE NOT CREDIBLE: DEFENDANT'S APPEAL SUCCESSFUL: "THE DEFENDANT PRESENTED AN ANSWERABLE CASE THAT THE CLAIMANTS FAILED TO PROVE THEIR CASE"

CLAIMANTS WERE NOT CREDIBLE: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL SUCCESSFUL: “THE DEFENDANT PRESENTED AN ANSWERABLE CASE THAT THE CLAIMANTS FAILED TO PROVE THEIR CASE”

May 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Case Management, Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Schedules, Witness statements

In Richards & Anor v Morris [2018] EWHC 1289 (QB) the defendant was successful in appealing on the grounds that the trial judge should have made more robust findings from the lack of credibility on the part of the claimants.   There…

SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 4th JULY 2018:  YOU WON'T HAVE FAR TO TRAVEL

SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 4th JULY 2018: YOU WON’T HAVE FAR TO TRAVEL

May 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Damages, Schedules

Following on from the recent post on drafting schedules and Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd [2018] EWHC 812 (QB)  I am presenting a webinar on schedules of damages on the 4th July 2018,  looking at these issues in more detail,…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 5: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES: NOT A NUMBER-CRUNCHING EXERCISE

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 5: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES: NOT A NUMBER-CRUNCHING EXERCISE

April 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Damages, Schedules, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth

If there is anything that suffers from being taken for granted it is the basic schedule and counter-schedule. This is demonstrated in the judgment available today in Wright v Satellite Information Services Ltd [2018] EWHC 812 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip. The appeal…

PROVING THINGS 62: "TOTALLY UNSATISFACTORY" EVIDENCE AT TRIAL FAILS TO PROVE SPECIAL DAMAGES

PROVING THINGS 62: “TOTALLY UNSATISFACTORY” EVIDENCE AT TRIAL FAILS TO PROVE SPECIAL DAMAGES

May 31, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Schedules, Witness statements

I wrote about the judgment in Stewart & Chergui -v- The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2017] EWHC 921 (QB), yesterday. There is no harm in repeating one element of that post in this series.  I am repeating it because…

APPEALS, COUNTER-SCHEDULES AND A RESERVE POSITION: NOT MANNA FOR THE DEFENDANTS

January 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Admissions, Appeals, Damages, Schedules, Statements of Case

We will be looking at the Court of Appeal decision in Manna -v- Central Manchester Hospitals NHS Trust [2017]  EWCA Civ 12 twice today.  Here I want to look at the difficulties the defendant had in arguing a point in…

TOO LONG OR TOO SHORT: SCHEDULES and COUNTER-SCHEDULES: THE "CINDERELLAS" OF THE LITIGATION PROCESS

December 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Schedules, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Uncategorized

One important, but often overlooked, element of procedure and legal drafting is the preparation of the schedule of damages and the counter-schedule.  The rules relating to these documents are sparse. However these are important documents, often impacting upon the credibility…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2023. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 31,358 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CROWING OVER COSTS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A LITIGANT: A REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA
  • THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
  • PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE
  • PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE
  • COSTS BITES 73: IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION THE APPLICANTS FAILED TO GET PAST THE FIRST STAGE

Top Posts & Pages

  • CROWING OVER COSTS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A LITIGANT: A REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA
  • "WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WITNESS STATEMENT AND SUBSTANTIVE SUBMISSIONS"
  • THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE FOR FACTS: KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS (AND WHY IT MATTERS)
  • PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2023 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin