Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Statements of Case » Page 7

PLEAD A DEFENCE PROPERLY OR BE STRUCK OUT: A HIGH COURT CASE CONSIDERED

October 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

The case of De Vere Holding Company -v- Belgravia Wealth Management KFT & Ors [2014] (QBD Judge Parkes QC) 15/10/14 was briefly reported on Lawtel today. It contains important observations on the role of pleadings. (This post is based on…

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT, MITCHELL AND DENTON: THE COURT OF APPEAL'S VIEW

October 15, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The question of how far the “Mitchell/Denton” principles apply to applications by defendants to set aside judgments was considered by the Court of Appeal in Regione Piemonte -v- Dexia Credop SpA [2014] EWCA Civ 1298.  It can be seen that these principles…

LIES, EVIDENCE, DISCLOSURE AND PROCEDURE : AA -v- LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK CONSIDERED

October 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Liability, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

It is certain that the decision in AA -v- London Borough of Southwark [2014] EWHC 500 QB will receive considerable coverage. It is a remarkable case. There are enormous implications for local authorities. Here we look at the procedural issues in…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, VERY LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AND DOCUMENTS: A DECISION TODAY

October 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Witness statements

The judgment of the Hon Mrs Justice Asplin DBE given today in Lictor Anstalt -v- MIR Steel UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 3316 (Ch) contained a consideration of the Denton criteria in relation to late service of witness evidence and documents….

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: STATEMENTS OF ISSUES; PLEADING AND PROOF

October 12, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

The decision of Mr Justice Walker in Burrows -v- Northumbrian Walker Ltd [2014] EWHC 3305(QB) considers the need for clarity in written submission and for the issues the judge is asked to determine to be clearly defined. It also considers…

VERY, VERY LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND PARTICULARS OF CLAIM ALLOWED

October 8, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In MacLeod -v- Mears [2014] EWHC 3140 QB Mr Justice Hamblen allowed the claimant to amend the particulars of claim very late, after a trial in fact.  THE FACTS The claimant brought an action alleging a failure to pay a…

DENTON APPLIES TO APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENTS: HOCKLEY -v- NORTH EAST LINCOLNSHIRE CONSIDERED

October 7, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

The issue of whether the “Mitchell/Denton/CPR 3.9” criteria apply to applications by a defendant to set aside a default judgment has been discussed several times on this blog. In Hockley -v- North Lincolnshire &  Goole NHS Trust (19th September 2014)…

SORTING MAJOR PROBLEMS OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF A TRIAL: SCHEDULES AND STATEMENT OF ISSUES SHOULD BE PREPARED IN ADVANCE NOT DURING A TRIAL

October 6, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

The major purpose of case management is to ensure that when a matter reaches trial the parties, and the judge, know precisely what the issues are in Redd Factors  -v- Bombadier Transportation [2014] EWCH 3138 (QB) this process clearly went…

PLEADING AND PROVING ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD OR DISHONESTY: MULLARKE -v- BROAD: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

October 2, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

Great care needs to be taken in pleading allegations of fraud or dishonesty.  In particular the pleader needs to be sure that there is sufficient evidence to justify the pleading.  This was considered in some detail by Lewison J in…

ADDUCING A SECOND EXPERT WITNESS LATE IN THE DAY: THWAYTES -v- SOTHEBYS CONSIDERED

September 18, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

There is a brief report on Lawtel today of a decision of Rose J in Thwaytes -v- Sothebys (16/09/2014) where permission was given for the defendant to rely on an additional expert and the application was heard six weeks before…

LIMITATION IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM: DATE OF ACCRUAL; LATENT DAMAGE AND AMENDING UNDER CPR 17.4.(2): A CASE IN POINT

September 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Interface Europe Ltd -v- Premier Hanks Dyers Ltd [2014] EWHC 2610 (QB) Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the issue of the relevant date of accrual of a cause of action in a breach…

AMENDING PLEADINGS: HAS THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED? WHERE DOES THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIE?

July 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

The Court of Appeal decision today in Mercer -v- Ballinger [2014] EWCA Civ 996 may appear to be an issue of esoteric civil procedure.  However the decision is an important one with far-ranging  practical consequences for a party seeking to…

PLEADING A DEFENCE PROPERLY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A "NON-ADMISSION" & A "DENIAL" EXPLORED

July 12, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The decision of Mr Justice Bean in Dil -v- Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2014] EWHC 2184 (QB)  relates to a police force’s obligations in relation to the disclosure of details of undercover operations and informers.  However it also deals…

AMENDING PLEADINGS LATE AND MITCHELL: NOT A SMOOTH JOURNEY

May 11, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

What relevance do the Mitchell principles have in relation to applications to amend pleadings. Particularly when those applications are made late?  This was considered by  Mrs Justice Andrews in Dany Lions Ltd -v- Bristol Cars Ltd [2014] EWHC (QB) 928….

CHANGING THE TRIAL DATE : A CASE IN POINT: MITCHELL REMAINS A "TOP BRAND"

May 11, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

Ever since the introduction of the Woolf reforms the trial date has been viewed as fairly sacrosanct. Once set it is hard to change without a good reason. This position has probably hardened as a result of Mitchell.  The issue…

PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: WHY THE PRACTICE DIRECTION IS (ALMOST ALWAYS) WRONG AND THE RULES ARE A SHAMBLES

May 4, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

It is well established law that the burden of proving a failure to mitigate loss lies with the defendant.   It is for the defendant to establish that the claimant failed to act reasonably.  Somewhat surprisingly a Practice Direction in…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT AGAIN: MCTEAR CONSIDERED IN DETAIL

March 31, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Striking out, Witness statements

The case of McTear -v- Englehard [2014] EWHC 722 (Ch) was looked at briefly in  an earlier post in relation to the number of cases cited to the Court.  Here we look at the substantive decision in relation to applications…

WHAT WOULD THE SUPREME COURT THINK ABOUT MATTERS RELATING TO PROCEDURE? CLUES FROM THE PRIVY COUNCIL?

March 15, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Striking out

The Mitchell case was not appealed.  Practitioners have no clue as to the approach of the Supreme Court to matters of procedure. However a decision of the Privy Council on the 3rd March makes interesting reading as to potential construction…

THE MITCHELL CRITERIA AND AMENDING PLEADINGS: A NEW CASE TO CONSIDER

March 10, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

I have added the case of Hague Plant Ltd -v- Hague [2014] EWHC 568 (Ch) to the “Mitchell Watch” section. It concerned a second application to amend the Particulars of Claim in a complex and long running commercial case.  I will…

← Previous 1 … 6 7

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 12.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 95: THE DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT THAT THE JUDGE HAD AWARDED THE CLAIMANTS MORE THAN THEIR PLEADED CASE
  • EXPERT WATCH 72: THE DEFENDANT HAD LEFT IT TOO LATE TO OBJECT TO THE CLAIMANTS’ EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE AT TRIAL NOT AT THE APPEAL STAGE
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: FOR WANT OF A PAGE IN A BUNDLE THE DAMAGES WERE LOWER… (SEPTEMBER 2015)
  • THE PAYING PARTY’S MANUAL: HOW TO REDUCE YOUR OWN CLIENT’S LIABILITY TO PAY THEIR OPPONENT’S COSTS: THE WEBINAR, THE BOOK AND THE TOOLKIT
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF DONE ABOUT – GUIDANCE FOR A PAYING PARTY: A 10 POINT CHECKLIST, USEFUL LINKS AND THE DISCOUNT CODE FOR THE WEBINAR AND BOOK THE PAYING PARTY’S MANUAL

Top Posts

COST BITES 455: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY ON WHETHER A CLIENT IS ENTITLED TO RAISE PART 18 QUESTIONS AS TO WHETHER THE SOLICITOR OBTAINED COMMISSION ON AN ATE PREMIUM
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WAIVING LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE BY MENTIONING IT IN A WITNESS STATEMENT
COST BITES 456: LET US ALL REMEMBER THAT THE DISPUTE THAT REACHED THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY WAS OVER THE PRINCELY SUM OF £25: "THE CLIENT HAS NEVER HAD ANY REAL ECONOMIC INTEREST IN THE PURSUIT OF THIS COSTLY LITIGATION"
PROPORTIONALITY IN LITIGATION (1): A TEN POINT GUIDE FOR CIVIL LITIGATORS: A REVIEW OF CASE LAW AND POSTS OVER THE PAST 13 YEARS
THE SRA CANNOT COMPEL A SOLICITOR TO DISCLOSE A CLIENT’S PRIVILEGED DOCUMENTS: THE FUNDAMENTAL IMPORTANCE OF LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE

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