Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login

Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers

Browse: Page 123

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…

RE-VISITING WHITEHOUSE -v- JORDAN 1: THESE APPEALS WERE NOT ABOUT CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AT ALL: IT’S ALL ABOUT THE FACTS

August 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The decisions of the Court of Appeal and House of Lords in Whitehouse -v- Jordan are often put forward as seminal cases in the law of clinical negligence.  However these appeals, in reality, were not about issues relating to clinical…

ADVOCACY - THE JUDGE'S VIEW V: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE

ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW V: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE

August 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links, Written advocacy

This series looks at the views from judges around the world and the advice they give to advocates.  Here we look at the article from J. Frederic Voros, jr for the Utah State Bar: To Persuade a Judge, Think Like…

APPLICATION TO DISCLOSE THIRD PARTY FUNDER REFUSED

August 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Third party funding, Uncategorized, Useful links

The opening passages of the judgment of H.H. Judge Keyser Q.C. in Dawnus Sierra Leone Limited -v- Timis Mining Corporation Limited [2016] EWHC B19 (TCC) deal with the issue of disclosure of details of third party funding. KEY POINTS A…

TOO LATE AND TOO LONG: OCEANS APART BUT TWO JUDGES HAVE THE SAME VIEW ON LAWYERS' LATE & LENGTHY SUBMISSIONS

August 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

Some parts of the legal profession do not have a reputation for concision. It is interesting to see similar observations coming from two judges, in two very different jurisdictions, on the same day. “Sly lawyers take advantage of this institutional…

BILLING YOUR OWN CLIENT: FIVE IMPORTANT LESSONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

August 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are number of important lessons to be drawn from the judgment yesterday of Master Gordon-Saker in Rahimian -v- Allan Janes LLP [2016] EWHC B18 (Costs). THE CASE The claimant sought an order that the defendant firm of solicitors deliver…

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…

CONSENT ORDERS, CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENTS, IMPLIED TERMS AND (LET'S BE HONEST) A PRETTY DETERMINED EFFORT TO AVOID PAYMENT

August 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Tobias Haynes from Waterside Legal LLP  for sending me a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Cooke in Hartland -v- Buccament Bay Resort Ltd (7th July 2016) a copy of which is attached to…

ATTRITIONAL WARFARE; UNMERITORIOUS POINTS AND UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH: SO MUCH (AND MORE) IN ONE JUDGMENT

August 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Damages, Default judgment,, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Edis in  Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust makes for uncomfortable reading on the issue of the general attitude of the lawyers towards the conduct of the litigation.   In addition to…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 4: DON'T MAKE ALLEGATIONS OF LYING IF YOU HAVEN'T PUT THEM TO THE WITNESS

August 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The previous posts* on the Arroyo judgment have concentrated, for the most part, on the judge’s criticisms of the evidence of the claimant.  However there is one short passage which illustrates an important principle of litigation – a party cannot…

PROVING THINGS 28: MAKE UNWARRANTED PERSONAL ATTACKS AND USE A "MUD-SLINGING" EXPERT: THAT ALWAYS ENDS WELL

August 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Scott -v- E.A.R. Sheppard Consulting & Civil Engineering Ltd [2016] 1949 (TCC) contains some surprising observations. It also contains important lessons in relation to “conspiracy” theories in litigation and the role of the…

PROVING THINGS 27: BURDENS OF PROOF, HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND…. ATTEMPTED MURDER

July 31, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Daley -v- Bakiyev [2016] EWHC 1972 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone dealt with issues relating to the burden of proof where there very serious allegations.  The fact that a central witness for the claimant did not attend court, and his…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 3: WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY

July 31, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This is the third in the series of posts on the  judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages; the second at the…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 2: EXPERTS, OH EXPERTS.

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the second in the series of posts on the  judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages. Here we look…

THE ARROYO CASE WAS A BIG & COMPLEX ACTION: THE PROBLEMS WERE SIMPLE (AND COMMON) 1: UNCHECKED SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC is 1885 paragraphs long.  The trial lasted from the 15th October 2014 to the 5th March 2015, that is 62 court days.  The judgment actually…

INCREASED COURT FEES FROM THE 25th July 2016: AN OVERVIEW & USEFUL LINKS

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been requests, via twitter, that I publicise the increase in court fees that came into effect on the 25th July.  These are not universal increases (they do not increase issue fees in Part 7 claims for instance -…

UNNECESSARY MATERIAL, DUPLICATION AND INFORMATION OVERLOAD: ANOTHER JUDGE'S LAMENT

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

The observations of Mr Justice Kerr at the end of his judgment in Kimmance -v- General Medical Council [2016] EWHC 1808 (Admin) contains some familiar themes in relation to the preparation of cases: bundles, citations and skeletons. “The parties should…

CLAIMANT ESTOPPED FROM RELYING ON QOCS: THE NEED TO BE ACCURATE

July 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to barrister Matthew White for sending me details and a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Lopez in Price -v- Egbert H Taylor &  Company Limited (16th June 2016).  This is the second judgment in the…

HAS A PART 36 OFFER BEEN BEATEN WHEN THE VALUE OF CURRENCY CHANGES? A HIGH COURT DECISION

July 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt today in Novus Aviation Ltd -v- Alubaf Arab International Bank BSC (c) [2016] EWHC 1937 (Comm) contains some interesting observations on Part 36 offers. KEY POINTS A claimant “beat” its own Part 36 offer…

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…

"SECOND" ACTION FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Wright -v- Barts Health NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 1834 (QB) Mr Justice Edis refused the defendant’s application to strike out the claim or for summary judgment on the grounds that the claimant had settled an…

PAYING THE "CORRECT" COURT FEE AND AMENDMENT: AN IMPORTANT CASE REVIEWING THE PRINCIPLES

July 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Limitation, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

This blog has looked several times* at the cases and principles that have followed the decision in Lewis -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch).   Applications around allegations of failure to pay the correct court fee have  become a new battleground…

REPLIES AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: A PRIMER

July 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

Two recent posts* have highlighted the difficulties that can exist with the filing of Replies and Defence to Counterclaim. Here is a short Primer. A REPLY If the Defence does not contain a counterclaim a Reply is not mandatory.  There…

IF YOU ARE GOING TO DRAFT PLEADINGS THEN DO IT PROPERLY: A REPLY AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM IS NOT A MERE FORMALITY

July 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Case Management, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

A post last month highlighted a case where a defendant obtained judgment in default on a counterclaim. The judge refused to set aside the judgment and, in effect, the claimant’s entire claim failed. There is a clear and obvious need…

PROVING THINGS 26: DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN WHAT YOU CAN REMEMBER AND WHAT YOU NOW THINK YOU DID

July 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There have been a large number of posts on this blog about witness evidence, in particular the way that the courts assess the accuracy of evidence.  A surprising number of these have been in the context of clinical negligence claims….

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: WHY IT CAN BE DANGEROUS FOR A DEFENDANT TO TAKE TECHNICAL POINTS

July 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

The decision of Master Mathews in DB UK Bank Limited -v- Sinclair Solicitors [2015] EWHC B29 (Ch) has today been reported on Bailli.  It is a case that shows the dangers of taking technical points as to service. “if I…

KEEPING PARTIES OUT OF COURT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS : COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

July 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The practice of sending witnesses out of court whilst evidence is being given is extremely rare in civil cases. It was considered by the Court of Appeal in Da Costa -v- Sargaco [2016] EWCA Civ 764. “… whilst there may…

← Previous 1 … 122 123 124 … 151 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 12.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • 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
  • COST BITES 457: COURT REFUSES APPLICATION TO MAKE LEGAL INSURERS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT: (WHY COSTS LAWYERS HAVE TO KNOW THE LAW OF EVIDENCE – PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS RELATING TO CONDUCT)
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF DONE ABOUT … PLEADING DAMAGES? A 10 POINT CHECKLIST TO AVOID YOUR CLIENTS (AND YOU…) GETTING INTO DIFFICULTIES…

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

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.