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

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

Browse: Page 125

WITNESS STATEMENTS CANNOT REPLACE PLEADINGS &"CUT AND PASTE" WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE UNLIKELY TO IMPRESS

May 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Chong -v- Alexander [2015] EWHC 735 (CH) Richard Spearman Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge) had to consider several issues relating to statements of case and witness evidence. “…the typographical error (“At” instead of “As”), is replicated in a…

PROVING THINGS 19: PROVE SERVICE OR YOU COULD BE CAUGHT OUT

May 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Serving documents, Uncategorized, Witness statements

A regular theme of this series has been to examine how cases fail, in full or partially, because of the absence of evidence. This can be seen in a decision of the First-Tier Tribunal Tax Chamber in England and Wales…

EXPERTS:YOU'RE NOT RIGHT JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE FAMOUS: A DECISION NOT WRITTEN ON THE BACK OF A FAG PACKET

May 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Green  in British American Tobacco (UK) Limited -v- Secretary of State for Health [2016] EWHC 1169 is 1,000 paragraphs long. It covers many aspects of law and procedure. I want to concentrate upon one issue….

PROVING THINGS 18: DAMAGES; CAR HIRE; PROOF AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT

May 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case, Summary judgment, Uncategorized

The burden is (usually) on a claimant to prove a loss.  There is an interesting discussion on the need to prove “need” in the decision of District Judge Read in Frankland -v- U.K. Insurance Ltd (10th August 2015) which was…

SUCCESS FEES:DEDUCTIONS FROM DAMAGES WHERE CLAIMANT IS UNDER A DISABILITY

May 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Members Content, Success Fees, Uncategorized

The issue of deductions of success fees in cases when the claimant is under a disability remains a difficult one. I am grateful to Jane McBennett of Morrish Solicitors in Bradford for the attached note in relation to a court…

FAILURE TO PAY THE CORRECT COURT FEE DOES NOT LEAD TO STRIKING OUT OF AN ACTION

May 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

The decision in  Lewis -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch)  has led to considerable interest (and it has to be said) some hyperbole and opportunistic applications. The case is often misunderstood. In Bhatti -v- Ashghar [2016] EWHC 1049 (QB)…

THE THIRD PARTIES (RIGHTS AGAINST INSURERS) ACT 2010 1: 5 INITIAL POINTS

May 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Insolvency, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

The Third Party (Rights Against Insurers) Act 2010 is shortly to come into force. Here are 5 key points. Here we look at the implementation date, legislative history and basic definitions of the Act. A BRIEF OVERVIEW The Act allows…

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…

CIVIL EVIDENCE: IS EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE ADMISSIBLE?

May 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The question of whether evidence obtained by torture in civil proceedings is one I never envisaged having address. However it was an issue considered in the judgment of Mr Justice Knowles MBE In Shangang Shipping Company Ltd -v- HNA Group…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: ALTERATIONS AND THE FALLIBLE MEMORY: A SCIENTIFIC STUDY

May 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

It is worthwhile anyone involved in assessment of witness evidence reading the post by Julia Shaw in Scientific America today: Do you suffer from memory blindness. The post refers back to the altered witness statements in the Hillsborough enquiries in the…

LEARNING HOW TO PROVE THINGS: A BASIC SKILL THAT NEEDS HONING

May 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

As part of the occasional series which jogs peoples memories about New Year’s resolutions for 2016 I am revisiting resolution number 6: “learn how to prove things”. A very basic skill in the litigator’s armoury, but one which is barely…

THE SUPREME COURT CONSIDERS THE QUESTION OF EXPENSIVE BUNDLES: COULD IT BE CHEAPER ELECTRONICALLY?

May 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

Since Supreme Court decisions on trial bundles are few and far between I am  compelled to write about the judgment in Eclipse Film Partners -v- Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2016] UKSC 24.  Here the Court considered bundles…

CIVIL EVIDENCE: ABSENT DOCTOR DOES NOT LEAD TO AN ADVERSE INFERENCE

May 13, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

CIVIL In Manzi -v- King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2016] EWHC 1101 (QB) Mr Justice Nicol considered the question of whether it was appropriate for a court to draw adverse inferences when a witness is not called. “… in…

EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF A CLAIM FORM: PROSECCO MAY HELP

May 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Insolvency, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

There have been numerous cases relating to extension of the claim form on this blog. I can’t remember one which ended well for the claimant.  However the claimant was successful in the Instone -v- Prosecco (Leeds) LImited [2016] EW Misc…

ASSIGNMENT OF CFAS: ROUND 2: ASSIGNMENT CAN TAKE PLACE

May 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Success Fees, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Jones -v- Spire Healthcare Ltd His Honour Graham Wood QC had to determine the issue of whether a CFA can be assigned. The full judgment is an attachment to this post and is available here…

PROVING THINGS 17: HEADS OF DAMAGE THAT WERE "ENTIRELY BOGUS"

May 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The case of Perma-Soil UK Limited -v- Williams & Flintshire County Council [2016] EWHC 1087 (QB) was an unusual one. The claimant (unsuccessfully) brought a claim for damages for misfeasance in public office. However I want to look at the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS & HILLSBOROUGH 3: CONFIRMATION BIAS AT ITS WORST

May 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Much has been written and broadcast about Hillsborough. I am here concentrating on one small part of the process: the initial gathering of evidence.  It was the flawed nature of this process that led to problems for the next two…

APPLICATION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION REFUSED: SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED

May 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB – THE JUDGE’S DECISION NOT TO ALLOW THE FIRST DEFENDANT TO WITHDRAW FROM THE ADMISSION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED ON APPEAL. See the post here. The judgment yesterday in Wood -v- Days Health UK Ltd & Others [2016] WHC 1079…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: THE PAST 12 MONTHS: A ROUND UP

May 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized, Useful links

On May 10th last year I did a round up of cases and commentary on the issue of fundamental dishonesty.  Here we look at cases and commentary in the past 12 months. CASES Most of the cases are inevitably first…

HILLSBOROUGH AND WITNESS STATEMENTS 2: THE EARLY MIXING OF FACT AND OPINION

May 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The previous post in this series looked at the issues that arose when the solicitors for the police force sent out a missive asking the police officers on the ground for their “comment and impression”.  There was an immediate mixing…

EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM SET ASIDE: A CASE ALL CLAIMANTS SHOULD KNOW

May 6, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

A really easy way for a claimant lawyer to get sued is to hold onto the claim form. Cases relating to late or mis-service of the claim form are a regular feature of this blog.  It is equally dangerous for…

THE INTERCHANGE BETWEEN LAWYERS & EXPERTS: A DIFFICULT ISSUE

May 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In a week where there is a report of an application being made for a doctor to be committed for contempt* it is prudent to consider that difficult issue of the relationship between the lawyers in a case and the…

THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION TO ADJOURN CANNOT BE IGNORED

May 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

A post last week noted the decision of the Court of Appeal in TBO Investments Ltd -v- Mohun Smith EWCA Civ 403 where the court stated that an application under CPR 39.3 should have been allowed when a defendant failed…

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…

RULES EXIST TO ASSIST RESOLUTION OF ISSUES AND NOT TO THROW UP TECHNICAL OBSTACLES

May 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Williams -v- Devon County Council [2016] EWCA Civ 419 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision by a judge to allow substitution of a named individual in place of a group. “These rules exist to enable the court to…

STATEMENT THAT THE APPELLANTS WERE CROOKS DID NOT GIVE RISE TO GROUNDS FOR RE-OPENING AN APPEAL

May 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

In the judgment given today in Goldtrail Travel Limited -v- Aydin [2016] EWCA Civ 439 the Court of Appeal rejected an application under CPR 52.17 to re-open an appeal on the grounds of bias. THE CASE The Court of Appeal…

WHEN A PARTY FAILS TO PAY INTERLOCUTORY COSTS: MAKE A PEREMPTORY ORDER

May 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Uncategorized

In Peak Hotels -v- Tarek Investments Ltd [2016] EWHC 690 (Ch) Mrs Justice Asplin considered the appropriate approach when a party  has failed to pay an interlocutory costs order.  There is a succinct summary of the relevant case law. “If…

RTA TRIAL FEE RECOVERABLE IF CASE SETTLES AT TRIAL

May 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, RTA Protocol, Uncategorized

In Mendes -v- Hocthtief (UK) Construction Ltd [2016] EWHC 976 (QB) Mr Justice Coulson decided a point of some importance: is the RTA Protocol brief fee recoverable if a matter settles at trial. “… there are sound policy reasons for…

COSTS: NOT EVERY DEFENDANT NEEDED REPRESENTATION ON APPEAL

April 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are some important observations about costs made by Mrs Justice Carr DBE in RSPCA -v- McCormick & others [2016] EWHC 928 (Admin). THE CASE The RSPCA brought an appeal by way of case stated as to the meaning of…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS REFUSAL TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AFTER DEFENDANT FAILED TO ATTEND TRIAL

April 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

Given the many strictures relating to the sanctity of the trial date the decision of the Court of Appeal in TBO Investments Ltd -v- Mohun-Smith [2016]  EWCA Civ 403 may be viewed as a surprising one. The defendant failed to…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT BY THE TRIAL JUDGE

April 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Elliston -v- Glencore Services (UK) Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 407 the Court of Appeal took the unusual step of overturning findings of fact by the trial judge. (It is perhaps important that I emphasise how rare this is. There…

UNCERTAINTY AS TO DAMAGES: JUST HOLD ONTO THE MONEY UNTIL FULL TIME

April 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Gibbs -v- Leeds United Football Club Ltd [2016] EWHC 960 (QB) Mr Justice Langstaff made an order that dealt with the question of uncertainty in relation to the assessment of damages. Rather than speculate on sums to be paid…

HILLSBOROUGH AND WITNESS STATEMENTS 1: THE INITIAL PROCESS AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS

April 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Hopefully we will never have another Hillsborough.   It is possible (even probable) that there will be circumstances in which lawyers are involved in the large scale collection of evidence.  The recent inquest has put the evidence gathering that took…

WHAT IS MEANT BY A "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT"? AMENDING THE COSTS BUDGET WHEN CLAIM DOUBLES IN SIZE: CLAIMANT GETS THE BOOT

April 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to barrister Colm Nugent for his notes of the decision of Mr Justice Picken in Churchill -v- Boot (22/04/2016) in relation to costs budgeting (a summary of this case is also available on Lawtel). KEY POINTS A…

PROVING THINGS 16: IF YOU DON'T PROVE IT YOU DON'T GET IT

April 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Undre & Down to Earth (London) Limited -v- the London Barrow of Harrow [2016] EWHC 931 a claimant failed, totally, to prove any loss.   The judge found that there was a total failure by the claimant to prove…

A BASIC THING THAT ANYONE PREPARING A WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD KNOW: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FACTS AND OPINION

April 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

  This blog has often observed that many litigators could make life a lot simpler if lay witnesses statements stopped trying to give expert evidence and expert witnesses stopped trying to determine issues of fact. I am grateful to Jeff…

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…

QOCS AND DISHONESTY: YOU CAN TRY TO CHECK OUT ANY TIME YOU LIKE BUT YOU CAN’T ALWAYS LEAVE

April 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

Thanks to Sintons LLP there is now a copy available online of the judgment of HH Judge Gosnell in Rouse -v- Aviva Insurance Limited (15th January 2016). This is another case that relates to discontinuance by the claimant in a…

PROVING THINGS 15: DAMAGES & EVIDENCE: GOING BACK TO COLLEGE

April 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

One harsh shock for many litigants occurs when they are asked to prove their damages at trial. We have looked several times when a litigant has come to grief at this stage, largely because there is no evidential support for…

CASE FAILS BECAUSE OF MATTERS NOT PLEADED: ANOTHER LESSON FOR PLEADERS

April 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

The decision of His Honour Judge David Grant yesterday in Bridgland -v- Earlsmead Estates Limited [2016] EWHC B9 (TCC) makes salutary reading for anyone who drafts pleadings.  If the claimants had pleaded their case differently they may have won.  It…

CAR HIRE CHARGES SHOULD STAY IN PROTOCOL: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

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

In Phillips -v- Willis [2016] EWCA Civ 401 the Court of Appeal gave some clear guidance as to the appropriate approach of the courts when the issues relating to damages are “whittled down” by agreement. The normal procedure is for…

THE RISKS OF JOINING A THIRD PARTY INTO AN ACTION: THE DEFENDANT MAY NOT RECOVER THE COSTS

April 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment on costs in Axon -v- Ministry of Defence [2016] EWHC 883 (QB) highlights the risks of a defendant bringing a Third Party into an action.  The defendant was successful, however the claimant was not ordered to pay all…

THE LIMITS OF QOCS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

April 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS

NB THIS DECISION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED ON APPEAL. SEE THE POST ON THE APPEAL AVAILABLE HERE  In Howe -v- Motor Insurers’ Bureau [2016] 884 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart considered the meaning of an action for “personal injury”. He held that…

A CASE YOU MUST READ IF YOU THINK PLEADINGS ARE NOT IMPORTANT

April 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

The opening paragraphs of the Court of Appeal decision today in The Prudential Assurance Company Limited -v- Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2016] EWCA Civ 376 should be compulsory reading for anyone who considers that pleadings can be…

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS CAN BE IN PRIVATE: DECHERT DECISION CONFIRMED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

April 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Dechert LLP -v- Eurasian Natural Resources Corporation Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 375 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that an assessment of costs could be in private.” “The issue is clearly of importance for both parties. On the…

ANOTHER CASE OF TWITTER PROVIDING EVIDENCE: CLAIMANT CAUGHT OFFSIDE

April 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is a report in the Solicitors Journal of a sentence passed today for contempt of court.  It is another example of the evidence coming from twitter and shows the growing importance of social media in many types of litigation….

ANOTHER COMMENT ON BUNDLES: TOO MUCH AND TOO BIG

April 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Bundles, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

I do not scour the law reports for complaints about trial bundles, they just keep occurring and I keep commenting.  It is a matter that has a surprisingly large readership: the post on how to prepare a trial bundle has…

EXPERT REPORTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: PART 35 APPLIES

April 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Khaled -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 857 (Admin) Mr Justice Garnham considered Part 35 of the CPR and the admissibility of expert reports in proceedings in the Administrative Court. “The…

£50,000 COSTS INCURRED: £500,000 ALLOWED: HOW DID THAT HAPPEN?

April 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Justice Spencer in Bolt Burdon Solicitors -v- Tariq [2016] EWHC 811 (QB) is an interesting consideration of non contentious business agreements.” The judge found that an agreement which meant that the solicitors recovered 50% of the damages…

PROVING THINGS 14: PROVING MITIGATION OF LOSS

April 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

The previous post in this series looked at the Court of Appeal decision in Bacciottini -v- Gotelee and Goldsmith [2016] EWCA Civ 170 where the court upheld an award of £250 in damages because of issues relating to mitigation of loss….

← Previous 1 … 124 125 126 … 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