Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Uncategorized » Page 6
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW VII: WITNESS STATEMENTS - SHORT AND SWEET IS BEST

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW VII: WITNESS STATEMENTS – SHORT AND SWEET IS BEST

October 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

We have already looked once this week at a judge’s viewpoint on the drafting of witness statements. In terms of advocacy they are crucial.  The rules only allow the witness to give additional evidence in exceptional circumstances.  Many cases that…

PROVING THINGS 33: CAUSATION AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN CLAIMS AGAINST SOLICITORS

October 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized

We have looked before at the decision in The Connaught Income Fund, Series 1 -v- Hewetts Solicitors  [2016] EWHC 2286 (Ch). The previous post was in connection with witness evidence.  However the judgment on the burden of proof is significant in terms…

DESTINATION OF APPEALS: THE NEW RULES

October 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

The Access to Justice Act 1999 (Destination of Appeals) Order 2016 makes some important changes to the destination of appeals. It “simplifies” the appeals process so that, as far as possible, an appeal lies to the next level of judge….

JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: NOT SIMPLY A CASE OF WHICH EXPERT IS PREFERRED

October 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is a short passage in the judgment in Barclays Bank PLC -v- Christie Owen & Davies Limited [2016] EWHC 2351 (Ch) which considers the appropriate approach of the court when considering expert evidence. “To consider simply whether to prefer…

BEING A LITIGATOR – WHEN IT ALL GETS TOO MUCH (AND IT IS YOU THAT HAS TO PICK UP THE PIECES)

October 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been a number of reported cases recently of young lawyers (sometimes trainees) obviously becoming overwhelmed by their workload.  This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it necessarily confined to young members of the profession. However it is…

LITIGANTS IN PERSON AND CASE MANAGEMENT: TIMELY SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS – DRAWING FROM THE FAMILY DIVISION

October 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

Recent cases have made it clear that litigants in person do not have any special status during the conduct of litigation. However it is equally clear that, when making case management decisions, the court has to have regard to the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, THE WEATHER AND THE DISTRICT JUDGE...

WITNESS STATEMENTS, THE WEATHER AND THE DISTRICT JUDGE…

October 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The observations by District Judge Etherington reported by John Hyde in the Law Society Gazette deserve repetition and the widest audience possible. (The Readers’ comments  on the article also make for interesting reading). THE GAZETTE REPORT The District Judge was speaking…

THIS COSTS BUDGETING THING – IT IS NOT THAT IMPORTANT: WELL THINK AGAIN

October 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Disclosure, Members Content, Security for Costs, Uncategorized

There are some important observations made by Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman Limited [2016] EWHC 2315 (Ch) in relation to both costs budgeting and security for costs. KEY POINTS There is no duty on a…

RECOVERING LITIGATION FUNDING COSTS: A HIGH COURT CASE -BUT ABOUT ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS

October 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Arbitration,, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Professor Dominic Regan and Nicholas Bacon QC for sending me a copy of the decision in Essar Oilfields -v- Norscot [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm).A decision of His Honour Judge Waksman QC sitting as a Judge of…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THINGS GO WRONG - BLAME THE SOLICITOR

WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THINGS GO WRONG – BLAME THE SOLICITOR

September 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This blog has noted before that a witness whose evidence is not accepted often attempts to renege on their witness statement and blame their solicitor for the errors. Another example can be found in the recent decision of Mr Recorder…

PROVING THINGS 32: DAMAGES CLAIM STRUCK OUT AS UNSUSTAINABLE; APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED.

September 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Guney -v- Kingsley Napley [2016] EWHC 2349 (QB) Mrs Justice McGowan struck out part of the claimant’s claim for damages and refused the claimant permission to amend to plead new heads of damage. It could serve as an object…

TWO PROCEDURAL POINTS: A SECOND ACTION IS NOT ALWAYS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS & A BANKRUPT CANNOT BRING PROCEEDINGS

September 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Second set of proceedings, Striking out, Uncategorized

The judgment of Master Bowles in Khan -v- Khan & Ambala Foods Limited [2015] EWHC 2625 (Ch) contains a reminder of two important procedural points. KEY POINTS (1) The issue of a second set of proceedings is potentially an abuse…

NEW APPEAL RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 3rd OCTOBER 2016

September 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal is attempting to deal with a backlog.  The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.3) Rules 2016 come into force on the 3rd October 2016.   The primary change is in relation to the way in which applications for…

PROVING THINGS 31: WITNESSES TEND TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY WANT TO REMEMBER

PROVING THINGS 31: WITNESSES TEND TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY WANT TO REMEMBER

September 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

How do judges decide whether a witness is accurate in their recollection? This issue has been a common theme on this blog.  This was an issue considered by Mark Cawson QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in The Connaught…

THE INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN FROM ABSENT WITNESSES: EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT OVERRIDES HEARSAY

THE INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN FROM ABSENT WITNESSES: EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT OVERRIDES HEARSAY

September 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Truth, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This blog has looked many times at cases which consider the practical implication of the test in Central Manchester Health Authority v W (A minor) [1998] PIQR P324: the inferences a trial judge should infer when witnesses are noted called at…

SOLICITOR'S AGENT HAS NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE AT STAGE 3 HEARING: COUNTY COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

September 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, RTA Protocol, Uncategorized

Who has a right of audience at a Stage 3 hearing? This issue has been considered in the county court and I am grateful to barrister Jonathan Dingle for sending me a copy of the decision of District Judge Peake…

INVALID SERVICE OF CLAIM ON SOLICITORS: ANOTHER CLAIM FORM INCORRECTLY SERVED

INVALID SERVICE OF CLAIM ON SOLICITORS: ANOTHER CLAIM FORM INCORRECTLY SERVED

September 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

Problems with service of the claim form are a regular feature of this blog. I have written, many times, about the dangers of leaving service of the claim form until the last minute.  I have also written, many times, about…

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE'S VIEW VI: HOW A JUDGE ASSESSES WITNESS EVIDENCE

ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW VI: HOW A JUDGE ASSESSES WITNESS EVIDENCE

September 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized

We have covered many countries so far in this series which looks at the advice that judges give on advocacy.  For the next few posts I have decided to stay closer to home.   I want to look at the…

CANAL TRUST'S ATTEMPTS TO BARGE OVER WITHOUT PREJUDICE RULE IS SUNK WITHOUT TRACE: NO WATERING DOWN OF THE PRINCIPLES

CANAL TRUST’S ATTEMPTS TO BARGE OVER WITHOUT PREJUDICE RULE IS SUNK WITHOUT TRACE: NO WATERING DOWN OF THE PRINCIPLES

September 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

Can a party refer to without prejudice correspondence at interlocutory hearings? The previous post looked at the judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Ravenscroft -v- Canal & River Trust [2016] EWHC 2282 (Ch) in relation to the issue of McKenzie friends….

MCKENZIE FRIENDS AND THE THREE WISE MONKEYS: A DISCRETION TO BE EXERCISED RARELY

September 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

In Ravenscroft -v- Canal & River Trust [2016] EWHC 2282 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered the law relating to allowing a McKenzie friend to be permitted to act. (This case also considered the use of without prejudice correspondence in court,…

PROVING THINGS 30: OFFICE GOSSIP PROVES NOTHING: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF

September 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Uncategorized

There is a requirement, a mandatory requirement, that a witness making a witness statement gives the source of their information and belief.  This requirement is often ignored, or there is some vague and general wording of knowledge.  Ignoring, and respecting,…

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT ARE LARGELY DISREGARDED: A CASE IN POINT

September 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Witness statements are often too long, contain inadmissible evidence and tendentious comments. An example can be see in the judgment in Moore -v- Moore [2016] EWHC 2202 (Ch) Mr S Monty QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery…

FAILURE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION IN WITNESS STATEMENT LEADS TO APPLICATION BEING STRUCK OUT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

September 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Striking out, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Chief Master Marsh has had a busy day. This is the second decision today I am writing about. In  Wave Lending Ltd -v- Batra and SFM Legal Services Ltd [2016] EWHC 2238 (Ch) he considered whether a witness statement complied…

COSTS BUDGETING AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: BUDGETING THE COSTS OF ASSISTANCE AND COUNSEL

September 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision today of Chief Master Marsh in Campbell -v- Campbell [2016] EWHC 2237 (Ch) deals with some important issues in relation to costs budgeting, the costs of litigants in person, instructing counsel and the nature of costs budgeting generally. “……

WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN CAN A LAY WITNESS GIVE OPINION EVIDENCE?THE STATUTE, THE CASES & SOME GUIDANCE

September 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

I have written, many times, about the dangers of putting opinion evidence into witness statements.  The attempts of witnesses to be experts, or to tell the judge what the outcome of the case should be, can lead to robust adverse…

LOOKING AT LITIGATION FROM THE LITIGANT'S VIEWPOINT 2: THE STRESS OF LITIGATION: GUIDANCE AND LINKS

September 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The earlier post on looking at litigation from the litigant’s viewpoint led to some interesting comments, on the blog itself; on LinkedIn and on twitter.   It was particularly interesting to hear from lawyers who had been involved in litigation…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE LAWYER'S DUTIES: A FAMILY CASE

September 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are some observations in the judgment in Hampshire County Council -v- O [2016] EW B22 (CC) that are of general importance. It relates to the duty of lawyers to ensure that witness statements are full and adequate. “It is…

I'VE LOST £5 MILLION AND ITS ALL MY SOLICITOR'S FAULT: WHEN THE CLIENT BLAMES YOU FOR THEIR OWN BAD DECISIONS

September 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized

 This post is unusual in that it deals with a case from a different jurisdiction (Northern Ireland) and a professional negligence action against a conveyancer not a litigator.  However the decision of Deeny J in Eden (NI) Limited -v- Mills,…

BANQUO'S GHOST NOT AT THE FEAST: WHEN A KEY WITNESS IS NOT CALLED - THE INFERENCES A COURT WILL DRAW

BANQUO’S GHOST NOT AT THE FEAST: WHEN A KEY WITNESS IS NOT CALLED – THE INFERENCES A COURT WILL DRAW

September 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is an interesting discussion of the role of the “absent witness” in the judgment today of Mr Justice Kerr in O’Hare -v-Coutts & Co [2016] EWHC 2224 (QB). There are dangers in a party not calling someone who is…

YOU ARE PAYING YOUR WITNESSES BY RESULTS: WE WANT TO STRIKE YOU OUT

September 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in EnergySolutions EU Limited -v- Nuclear Decommissioning Authority [2016] EWHC 1988 (TCC) is a highly technical analysis of procurement legislation in an action that had already had a somewhat tortuous procedural history.  However I…

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…

PROPORTIONATE COSTS IN A FAMILY CASE: £33,813 REDUCED TO £3,737.50

September 6, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

In K -v- K [2016] EWHC 2002 (Fam) Mr Justice Macdonald reduced the costs of a successful party to an appeal in a family case. “The stringent test of proportionality in relation to costs incurred applies with equal force in…

PROVING THINGS 29: MAKE SURE THE WITNESS EVIDENCE DEALS WITH THE RELEVANT ISSUES

September 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Re B (a minor) (habitual residence) [2016] EWHC 2174 (Fam) Mr Justice Hayden had some important observations on the preparation of witness evidence. Although made in a family case the comments are of general observation: those who take witness…

YOUR WITNESSES ARE LINED UP ALL IN A ROW: THEN YOU MAY BE IN TROUBLE

September 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Many cases have many witnesses saying, essentially, the same thing. Inconsistencies between witnesses are (often subconsciously) ironed out by lawyers during the statement stage. However consistency is not always a good thing. WHEN WITNESSES AGREE 100%: THEY’RE PROBABLY WRONG This…

LOOKING AT LITIGATION FROM THE LITIGANT'S VIEWPOINT 1: A BOOK WORTH READING

LOOKING AT LITIGATION FROM THE LITIGANT'S VIEWPOINT 1: A BOOK WORTH READING

September 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is surprisingly little written about the actual experience of being a litigant, particularly a litigant in the civil courts.  What is more the “experience”, or viewpoint of the client does not figure greatly (if at all) in legal training.  Doctors have…

CHALLENGING VIDEO SURVEILLANCE BY THE USE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE PREQUEL

September 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

Last month I wrote about the decision of Mr Justice Edis in  Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1962 (QB). One of the many issues the judge considered in that case was the admissibility of expert evidence to…

THAT JUDGE IS BIASED AGAINST ME, WE CAN'T GO ON: THE APPROPRIATE RESPONSE

September 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Uncategorized

As we have seen many times in this blog trial judges sometimes have to make robust findings of fact about the credibility of witnesses. In Howe -v- Gossop [2016] EWHC 2169 (Ch) His Honour Judge Behrens (sitting as a High…

QOCS & DISCONTINUANCE: ANOTHER CASE (WHERE THE CLAIMANT WAS SUCCESSFUL)

September 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to barrister James Bentley for drawing my attention to the judgment of Mr Recorder Berkley in Magon -v- Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance PLC  (26th February 2016). Another decision in relation to QOCS and discontinuance. The District Judge…

FRAUDULENT CLAIMANTS AND THE NEED FOR SELF-PROTECTION BY LAWYERS

FRAUDULENT CLAIMANTS AND THE NEED FOR SELF-PROTECTION BY LAWYERS

August 30, 2016 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized, Witness statements

A report in Litigation Futures last week illustrates the need for “self protection” by lawyers. The headline says it all “Insurance Fraudster who tried to blame his solicitor jailed for 18 months”. “IT WAS ALL MY SOLICITOR’S FAULT” The claimant…

OBTAIN AN INJUNCTION: PAY TENS OF MILLIONS IN COMPENSATION: ANOTHER WARNING LESSON

August 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Injunctions, Members Content, Uncategorized

This blog has looked several times at the dangers of obtaining injunctions. A particular danger is the undertaking in damages that has to be given when obtaining an injunction to freeze assets.  The judgment of Mr Justice Males in Fiona…

NON-SOLICITOR LITIGATION ENTITIES AND WASTED COSTS: WANT TO BE £102,000 OUT OF POCKET?

August 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Wasted Costs, Witness statements

An earlier post looked at the issues relating to litigation being conducted by an non-authorised entity.  In M A Lloyd & Son Ltd -v- PPC International Limited [2016] EWHC 2162 (QB) issues of wasted costs arose in relation to a…

STATING THAT YOU ARE NOT WAIVING PRIVILEGE IN A WITNESS STATEMENT IS FAR FROM CONCLUSIVE

August 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are several reasons litigators should read the judgment of Master Matthews in Coral Reef Limited -v- Silverbond Enterprise Limited [2016] EWHC 874 Ch. For the discussion of whether a Master is bound by the decision of a High Court…

A BLUEPRINT FOR TROUBLE? A CAUTIONARY TALE FOR ANYONE CONSIDERING "ALTERNATIVES" TO SOLICITORS IN LITIGATION

August 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Master Matthews in Lyons -v-Kerr-Robinson [2016] EWHC 2137 (Ch) contains a cautionary tale for anyone proposing to use an alternative to solicitors to conduct their litigation.  The defendant in this case used licensed conveyancers. Their charges were…

THE COURT OF APPEAL THRESHOLD: LOOKING AT CASES WHERE PERMISSION TO APPEAL WAS REFUSED

August 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

The Law Society Gazette today reported that the threshold for appealing to the Court of Appeal is not to change.  There is, however, a removal of the automatic right to an oral hearing when seeking permission from the court. Coincidentally…

ANOTHER ROUND IN THE CFA ASSIGNMENT BATTLE: CFA CAN BE ASSIGNED

August 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Conditional Fee Agreements, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Azim -v- Tradwise Insurance Services Limited [2016] EWHC B20 (Costs) Master Leonard found that a conditional fee agreement could properly be assigned. KEY POINTS An assignment of a CFA between solicitors was valid. The validity of an assignment did…

AN EXPERT DISPLAYING ZEALOTRY IS NO HELP AT ALL (AND USUALLY HARMFUL)

August 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In the Matter of F (a Minor)  EWHC 2149 (Fam)Mr Justice Hayden had to consider whether an expert report should be admitted in a family case.  The comments on the expert evidence are of general relevance. “The overall impression is…

PAYING THE CORRECT COURT FEE: ACTION STAYED: SANITY IS BREAKING OUT

August 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are several interesting issues arising out of the judgment of Master Clark in Lifestyles Equities C.V. -v- Sportsdirect.Com Retail Limited [2016] EWHC 2092.   In particular the fact that the decision in Richard Lewis & Others -v- Ward Hadaway [2015]…

COSTS BUDGETING IS APPROPRIATE AND NECESSARY IN A HIGH VALUE CASE : BUT IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL

August 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

In Signia Wealth Limited -v- Marlborough Trust Company Limited [2016] EWHC 2141 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered two issues relating to case management: whether costs budgeting should apply and whether a split trial was appropriate. KEY POINTS Costs budgeting A…

REVISITING WHITEHOUSE -v- JORDAN 2: ON THE LAWYERS DRAFTING THE EXPERTS' REPORTS

August 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

The first post in this series on the judgments in Whitehouse -v- Jordan in the Court of Appeal and House of Lords  looked at the point that, at the appeal stage, the courts were only concerned with whether they could…

WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES AFTER A DEFAULT JUDGMENT 3: A NUANCED APPROACH

August 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Default judgment,, Members Content, Uncategorized

We have looked several times before at the question of what a defendant can argue in relation to damages after judgment has been entered*.  The recent decision of Master Matthews in Merito Financial Services Limited -v- David Yelloly [2016] EWHC…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 17 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

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)

Top Posts

  • COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF "COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS": THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 2: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PD57AC: "HE KNOWS NOT OF WHAT HE SPEAKS"

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.