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

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

Browse: Page 65

COURT ALLOWS ASSESSMENT OF SOLICITOR’S BILLS OUTSIDE 12 MONTHS: PUBLIC SPIRITED LITIGATION DOES NOT AMOUNT TO SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

March 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Mark Carlisle  for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Brown in Erlam -v- Edmonds Marshall McMahon Limited (SCCO – 19th November 2020 – a copy available here Erlam v Edmonds Marshall McMahon Ltd…

BARRISTER SUES FOR FEES: COURT STRIKES OUT SOLICITOR'S DEFENCE: BARRISTER OWES NO DUTY OF CARE TO SOLICITOR

BARRISTER SUES FOR FEES: COURT STRIKES OUT SOLICITOR’S DEFENCE: BARRISTER OWES NO DUTY OF CARE TO SOLICITOR

March 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Summary judgment

In McFarland-Cruickshanks v England Kerr Hands Solicitors Ltd [2021] EWHC 525 (Comm) HHK Worster (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted an application to strike out the defence and counterclaim and for summary judgment.   The claimant was a barrister suing…

WEBINAR SERIES ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES:  STARTING JUNE 2021

WEBINAR SERIES ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: STARTING JUNE 2021

March 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

In June this year I am presenting a series of six webinars which deal with major aspects of a claim for damages for personal injury.   This series goes through each major element of a claim for damages, looking at…

WHY, IF YOU PRACTICE IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS, YOU HAVE TO LEARN TO ASK NON-LEADING QUESTIONS...

WHY, IF YOU PRACTICE IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS, YOU HAVE TO LEARN TO ASK NON-LEADING QUESTIONS…

March 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

It is difficult to understate the depth and breadth of the new rules coming into force on the 6th April in the BPC. One good example is the fact that the person taking a witness statement has got to learn…

COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47

COSTS, CONDUCT AND ASSESSMENT ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: £2 MILLION SPENT TO RECOVER £40,666.47

March 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

An earlier post looked at the construction of the Part 36 offer in Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division).  Here we look at…

AMBIGUITY AS TO DATE DID NOT INVALIDATE A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION

AMBIGUITY AS TO DATE DID NOT INVALIDATE A PART 36 OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION

March 21, 2021 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Proportionality

In  Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 653 (Ch) Andrew Lenon Q.C. (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) rejected the defendants’ arguments that an ambiguity as to the date meant that a Part…

SEDLEY'S LAW GOES ONLINE... : "IT IS NECESSARY FOR ME TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE UNSATISFACTORY MANNER IN WHICH BUNDLES OF DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR TRIAL"

SEDLEY’S LAW GOES ONLINE… : “IT IS NECESSARY FOR ME TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THE UNSATISFACTORY MANNER IN WHICH BUNDLES OF DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN PREPARED FOR TRIAL”

March 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Bundles, Members Content

If you thought that electronic bundles were the panacea that was going to put an end to the numerous posts on this blog recording (largely) judicial criticisms of bundles, think again.   The judgment  today of HHJ Cawson QC, sitting as…

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT THE CLAIMANT DISCLOSED BY MISTAKE: HIGH COURT RULING

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT THE CLAIMANT DISCLOSED BY MISTAKE: HIGH COURT RULING

March 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Barclay-Watt & Ors v Alpha Panareti Public Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 642 (Comm) Sir Michael Burton (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted a defendants’ application to rely on witness statements mistakenly disclosed by the claimant.   “The…

CLAIMANT WHO GAVE MISLEADING ACCOUNT OF HER INJURIES FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST

CLAIMANT WHO GAVE MISLEADING ACCOUNT OF HER INJURIES FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST

March 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

In Smith v London Borough of Haringey [2021] EWHC 615 (QB) Master David Cook found a claimant to be fundamentally dishonest. A failure to disclose previous back problems, coupled with an exaggeration of her medical condition was found to be…

CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER TO ACCEPT 90% OF DAMAGES NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION IS IN ISSUE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER TO ACCEPT 90% OF DAMAGES NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION IS IN ISSUE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

March 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content, Part 36

In the judgment today in Seabrook v Adam [2021] EWCA Civ 382 the Court of Appeal considered when a Part 36 offer to accept a reduced percentage on liability was effective when only causation was in dispute.  It was held…

PROVING THINGS 207: CORPORATE INSOLVENCY AND CORONAVIRUS: A COMPANY STILL HAS TO  PROVE SOLVENCY PROBLEMS WERE DUE TO COVID

PROVING THINGS 207: CORPORATE INSOLVENCY AND CORONAVIRUS: A COMPANY STILL HAS TO PROVE SOLVENCY PROBLEMS WERE DUE TO COVID

March 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus, Members Content

In PGH Investments Ltd v Ewing [2021] EWHC 533 (Ch) Deputy ICC Judge Passfield considered questions of evidence in relation to the provisions that prevent winding up of a company when it can establish that its financial state is due…

DEFENDANT REQUIRES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN THERE WAS £92 MILLION AT STAKE:  DENTON CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

DEFENDANT REQUIRES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN THERE WAS £92 MILLION AT STAKE: DENTON CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

March 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

When I wrote earlier about the decision in Various Claimants v G4S Plc [2021] EWHC 524 (Ch) I noted that it required more than one post. Here we look at the judge’s decision in relation to relief from sanctions. Relief was…

"THIS APPLICATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT ABUSE OF THE PROCEDURES ... AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE": THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, DUTIES TO THE COURT AND THE HAMID JURISDICTION

“THIS APPLICATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT ABUSE OF THE PROCEDURES … AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE”: THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, DUTIES TO THE COURT AND THE HAMID JURISDICTION

March 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Conduct, Members Content

In  the judgment today in  DVP & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 606 (Admin) the Administrative Court exercised considered a case referred to it under the “Hamid” jurisdiction…

NO PUBLIC FUNDING FOR PARENTS WHEN THE LIFE OF THEIR CHILD IS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE COURT: A DECISION THAT HIGHLIGHTS A MAJOR ISSUE

March 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Members Content

There judgment in the  heartbreaking case of  The NHS Trust v The Parents & S [2021] EWHC 594 (Fam) raises many issues. Here I want to highlight  one aspect of legal funding , (along with pointing to the magnificent steps…

EXAGGERATING AND INFLATING CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM LED TO CLAIMANT BEING SENTENCED TO SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT: "THERE IS NO ROBIN HOOD DEFENCE HERE"

EXAGGERATING AND INFLATING CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM LED TO CLAIMANT BEING SENTENCED TO SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT: “THERE IS NO ROBIN HOOD DEFENCE HERE”

March 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Committal proceedings, Members Content

In Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust v Metcalf [2021] EWHC 611 (QB) Mr Justice Griffiths sentenced a claimant to six months imprisonment following the exaggeration of a claim for damages. “She was, by her contempt of court, effectively stealing…

SOLICITORS AND ATTENDANCE  NOTES: JUDGES NEARLY ALWAYS PREFER THE CONTEMPORANEOUS NOTES

SOLICITORS AND ATTENDANCE NOTES: JUDGES NEARLY ALWAYS PREFER THE CONTEMPORANEOUS NOTES

March 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHK Keyser QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Mundil-Williams v Williams & Ors [2021] EWHC 586 (Ch) serves as a reminder of the importance of contemporary attendance notes as a source of evidence. “the best…

JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIMS OF CLAIMANTS JOINED INTO ACTION AFTER CLAIM FORM WAS ISSUED: WHEN AMENDED PLEADINGS START TO RESEMBLE A RAINBOW

JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIMS OF CLAIMANTS JOINED INTO ACTION AFTER CLAIM FORM WAS ISSUED: WHEN AMENDED PLEADINGS START TO RESEMBLE A RAINBOW

March 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

The case of  Various Claimants v G4S Plc [2021] EWHC 524 (Ch)is one that bristles with procedural issues.  Here we look at one issue – the judge striking out the claimants that were added after issue of the claim form…

HOUSING POSSESSION DUTY DESK: SIMON MULLINGS AND SUE JAMES:  "SO MUCH MORE THAN" A PRACTICAL GUIDE

HOUSING POSSESSION DUTY DESK: SIMON MULLINGS AND SUE JAMES: “SO MUCH MORE THAN” A PRACTICAL GUIDE

March 14, 2021 · by gexall · in Book Review, Civil Procedure, Members Content

If there is a “front line” of the legal world a large part of it has to be the housing possession duty desk.  A lawyer, with no previous knowledge of the case, is called upon to try to save the…

THE NEW RULES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: WHY THE IRON FIST? BASICALLY - THE PROFESSION HAD IT COMING

THE NEW RULES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: WHY THE IRON FIST? BASICALLY – THE PROFESSION HAD IT COMING

March 13, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

As anyone practising in the BPC is just about to discover the rules  on witness statements coming into force next month are highly prescriptive, even covering the way in which questions are to be asked to witnesses.  Further it has…

ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WEBINAR 11th MAY 2021

March 13, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

 I am co-presenting a webinar with solicitor John McQuater on fundamental dishonesty in personal injury action on the 11th May 2021. HOW TO BOOK Details of how to book are available here.  THE WEBINAR This webinar will bring you right…

WHEN JUDGE READS A DRAFT STATEMENT AND A FINAL STATEMENT (& THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES): LITIGANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE COURT AT THE ORIGINAL HEARING

WHEN JUDGE READS A DRAFT STATEMENT AND A FINAL STATEMENT (& THERE ARE SOME IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES): LITIGANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE THAT COULD HAVE BEEN BEFORE THE COURT AT THE ORIGINAL HEARING

March 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Francis in Brack v Brack [2020] EWHC 2142 (Fam) is an example of a case where the judge has the opportunity to see a draft statement and a final statement.  The judge struck out an…

THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIOD: ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, PUBLIC POLICY - AND A BASIC ERROR ABOUT THE DATE: CLAIMANT HAS TO FALL BACK ON "UNDUE HARDSHIP" ARGUMENT

THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIOD: ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, PUBLIC POLICY – AND A BASIC ERROR ABOUT THE DATE: CLAIMANT HAS TO FALL BACK ON “UNDUE HARDSHIP” ARGUMENT

March 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision in Begum v Maran (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 326 contains some interesting observations on the law of tort and duty of care.  However the claimant in this case faces another fundamental challenge.  There is…

SANCTIONS FOR LATE FAILURE TO FILE A COSTS BUDGET DO NOT APPLY TO INCURRED COSTS: REPORT OF A COUNTY COURT DECISION

March 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Sanctions

Recommended reading today is a useful report from PIC available here in relation to a decision in Hardy -v- Skeelis (4th March 2021, County Court at Stoke, HHJ Rawlings).  The appeal decision confirms that the sanctions imposed for failing to…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: 12 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW TO AVOID "DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH"

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: 12 THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW TO AVOID “DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH”

March 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Service of the claim form remains a continual source of problems for litigators.  Issues relating to service of the claim form are often described as “dicing with procedural death”.  I am here mainly repeating an earlier post on this issue…

COURT CAN COMPEL SOLICITOR TO ATTEND COURT TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES (THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL)

COURT CAN COMPEL SOLICITOR TO ATTEND COURT TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES (THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL)

March 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Wasted Costs, Witness statements

NB THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL, SEE THE DECISION AT Hunt v Annolight Ltd & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1663 The decision of Mr Justice Saini in  Hunt Annolight Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 3744 (QB) has just arrived on…

LAWYERS (AND ALL LITIGANTS) REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT WRITE TO THE COURT WITHOUT COPYING IN THE PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION

LAWYERS (AND ALL LITIGANTS) REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT WRITE TO THE COURT WITHOUT COPYING IN THE PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION

March 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

For the second time in two days I am writing of a case where a party has written to the court unilaterally, without copying in the other parties.  It was a matter raised in the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham…

JUDGE REFUSES TO VARY THE TERMS OF ORIGINAL ORDER: DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION DID NOT FLY

JUDGE REFUSES TO VARY THE TERMS OF ORIGINAL ORDER: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION DID NOT FLY

March 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Walton Family Estates Ltd & Ors v GID Services Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 464 (Comm) Andrew Hochhauser QC, sitting as a judge of the High Court, refused a defendant’s application to reconsider the terms of an earlier order. …

A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO QOCS PROTECTION: THAT WAS NOT WHAT THE JACKSON REFORM WERE FOR...

A COUNTERCLAIMING DEFENDANT IS NOT ENTITLED TO QOCS PROTECTION: THAT WAS NOT WHAT THE JACKSON REFORM WERE FOR…

March 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

I am grateful to barrister Stephen Elphick for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Gargan in Sutcliffe -v- Ali (County Court at Middlesbrough 15th January 2021). It is a case that deals with the issue of whether…

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDERS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN STONE: COURT SHOULD NOT BE "STUCK IN THE RAILS": MASTER COULD VARY ORDER OF PREVIOUS MASTER

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDERS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN STONE: COURT SHOULD NOT BE “STUCK IN THE RAILS”: MASTER COULD VARY ORDER OF PREVIOUS MASTER

March 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Members Content

In  Oyston & Anor v Rubin & Anor [2021] EWHC 448 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles considered arguments in relation to whether a Master was entitled to vary a previous order made by a different Master.   The judge emphasised that case…

APPEAL ALLOWED WHERE THE TRIAL JUDGE DEPARTED FROM THE PLEADED CASE: "A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE JUDGE'S FUNCTION)

APPEAL ALLOWED WHERE THE TRIAL JUDGE DEPARTED FROM THE PLEADED CASE: “A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE JUDGE’S FUNCTION)

March 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Satyam Enterprises Ltd v Burton & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 287 provides another example of the importance of statements of case. The Court allowed an appeal where the trial judge had…

PROVING THINGS 206: THE EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT) ACT 1969 IN ACTION

PROVING THINGS 206: THE EMPLOYERS LIABILITY (DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT) ACT 1969 IN ACTION

March 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to  Martin McKenna from Aegis solicitors  for sending me a copy of the judgment of DDJ Morgan MBE in Johnson -v- National Platforms Ltd (a copy of which is available here Johnson v Nationwide Platforms Limited (Final))….

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6TH APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE CLIENT HAS TO SIGN - AND WHY IT POINTS STRAIGHT BACK AT YOU

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6TH APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE CLIENT HAS TO SIGN – AND WHY IT POINTS STRAIGHT BACK AT YOU

March 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

In addition to the new requirement for the solicitor to sign a declaration that the witness statement complies with the rules the witness themselves has to sign a declaration.  The witness declaration, however, does not get the lawyer off the…

THINGS THAT LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: SCOWL AND POUT... & ROLL YOUR EYES

THINGS THAT LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: SCOWL AND POUT… & ROLL YOUR EYES

March 7, 2021 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Members Content, Useful links, Written advocacy

For the past two weeks we have been looking at some of the judgments of Canadian judge Mr Justice Joseph W. Quinn. To complete the series we will look again at the guidance he gave  to the Ontario Bar Association in…

CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END

CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END

March 5, 2021 · by gexall · in Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Nadia Whittaker  for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Sephton QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Iddon -v- Warner, a judgment given on the 2nd March 2021. A copy of…

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6th APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE SOLICITOR HAS TO SIGN

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6th APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE SOLICITOR HAS TO SIGN

March 5, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

One of the many requirements that come into force on the 6th April is the requirement for the solicitor to sign a declaration that the witness statement complies with the rules. This is not an obligation that can be taken…

AVOIDING PROBLEMS: TWELVE THINGS FOR LITIGATORS TO THINK ABOUT IN MARCH

AVOIDING PROBLEMS: TWELVE THINGS FOR LITIGATORS TO THINK ABOUT IN MARCH

March 4, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

I am here re-visiting advice first given in 2016. However everything written then appears equally valid today. Indeed the contents of this blog over the past five years serves basically amplifies every issue raised here. 1. NEVER, EVER, GUESS ABOUT…

GOING BANKRUPT DID NOT RELEASE BANKRUPT FROM A JUDGMENT DEBT: JUDGE GIVES PERMISSION FOR ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS TO CONTINUE DESPITE A SUBSTANTIAL DELAY

March 4, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Enforcement, Insolvency, Members Content

In  Jones & Pyle Developments Ltd v Rymell [2021] EWHC 385 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews found that a judgment debt was not released by bankruptcy. He also allowed enforcement proceedings to continue, despite a substantial delay. THE CASE The claimant…

PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES

PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES

March 3, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Costs, Damages, Members Content

In Cakebread & Anor v Fitzwilliam [2021] EWHC 472 (Comm) Sir Ross Cranston (sitting as a High Court judge) considered an argument from the claimant barristers that an arbitrator had erred in refusing to award them their fees.  The essential…

"WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF?" WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? 10 KEY POINTS RE-VISITED

“WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF?” WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? 10 KEY POINTS RE-VISITED

March 3, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

The question “What’s the difference between knowledge and belief” was a search term that led to this blog yesterday.  I mentioned this on Twitter and it has led to some interesting responses, ranging from the philosophical to the whimsical. You…

SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: DELAY, FAILING TO KNOW THE CORRECT PROCEDURE AND ABSENCE OF MERITS: LORD CHANCELLOR WINS THE DAY…

March 3, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

The judgment of Master Thornett in  The Lord Chancellor (as Successor to the Legal Services Comission) v Halberstadt-Twum (t/a Cleveland Solicitors) & Anor [2021] EWHC 413 contains some object lessons for anyone involved in an application to set aside default…

“DENTON PROOFING” YOUR PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE – KNOWING WHERE THINGS GO WRONG AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT: WEBINAR 11th MARCH 2021

March 2, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Webinar

This blog has reported numerous cases where practitioners have fallen foul of the civil procedure rules. On the 11th March I am giving a webinar aimed at helping to avoid problems and also dealing with the steps that should be…

THE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ADMIRALTY CLAIMS: NEW RULES WILL APPLY

THE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ADMIRALTY CLAIMS: NEW RULES WILL APPLY

March 2, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes, Webinar, Witness statements

The new requirements for certification of witness statements in the Business and Property Courts come into force on the 6th April 2021.  Initially it was thought that Admiralty claims may be excluded, because of the importance of contemporary statements in…

SNAILS, BOXES, RATES, OFFICES  AND CIVIL PROCEDURE: A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT AN INVITATION TO CRITIQUE IT

SNAILS, BOXES, RATES, OFFICES AND CIVIL PROCEDURE: A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT AN INVITATION TO CRITIQUE IT

March 2, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in Isle Investments Ltd v Leeds City Council (Rev 1) [2021] EWHC 345 (Admin) contains a reminder of the point that a draft judgment is not an opportunity to re-open or critique the substance…

UNLESS ORDER MADE WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAD NOT PAID AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER FOR COSTS

UNLESS ORDER MADE WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAD NOT PAID AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER FOR COSTS

March 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Striking out, Summary assessment,

In Junejo v New Vision TV Ltd [2021] EWHC 449 (QB) Deputy Master Hill QC made a peremptory order that the claimant pay an order for costs.  However that payment was to be by instalments.  There is a useful review…

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS ROUND UP: FEBRUARY 2021

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS ROUND UP: FEBRUARY 2021

March 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Brexit, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

 A round up of posts and articles about civil procedure and costs in February 2021.   THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES The Law Society Gazette Litigants baffled as Civil Procedure Rules move to new site Litigation Futures  Minister promises urgent review of…

THE JUDICIAL USE OF FOOTNOTES: A WIFE TRYING TO RUN HUSBAND OVER WITH A VAN IS “ALWAYS A TELLTALE SIGN THAT A COUPLE ARE DRIFTING APART”

THE JUDICIAL USE OF FOOTNOTES: A WIFE TRYING TO RUN HUSBAND OVER WITH A VAN IS “ALWAYS A TELLTALE SIGN THAT A COUPLE ARE DRIFTING APART”

February 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The number of people who had not read the judgement of Canadian judge J.W. Quinn looked at last Sunday made me think that this would be a good time to remind people of the judgment in Bruni -v- Bruni  in 2010.  The…

"THE DEVELOPING BODY OF LAW AS TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COSTS MANAGEMENT AND DETAILED ASSESSMENT": INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS AFTER A TRIAL: 90% OF BUDGETED COSTS 70% OF INCURRED COSTS

“THE DEVELOPING BODY OF LAW AS TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COSTS MANAGEMENT AND DETAILED ASSESSMENT”: INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS AFTER A TRIAL: 90% OF BUDGETED COSTS 70% OF INCURRED COSTS

February 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content

The courts have been supportive of applications for interim costs for a successful party after a trial.  The interim payment at this stage is not nominal and is normally firmly based on the budgeted costs. A working example can be…

MEDIATION PRIVILEGE UPHELD: "PARTIES MUST BE FREE TO CANDIDLY DISCUSS ALL OPTIONS FOR SETTLEMENT"

MEDIATION PRIVILEGE UPHELD: “PARTIES MUST BE FREE TO CANDIDLY DISCUSS ALL OPTIONS FOR SETTLEMENT”

February 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content

In E (A Child) (Mediation Privilege), Re [2020] EWHC 3379 (Fam) Mr L Samuels QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) granted an application to prevent a party relying on matters that took place in a mediation. “Parties must be…

"BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME": THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF "SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS"

“BUILD IT AND WHO CARES IF THEY COME”: THE REGISTER ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE COURT RULES AND LISTING ONLINE: THE ABSENCE OF “SCHOOL-GRADE WEB SKILLS”

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil Procedure, Members Content

An interesting explanation of why practitioners, and others, are having problems with access to rules of court and listing can be found in The Register – which provides news on technology for I T Professionals.  The Register reports that the…

AN APPLICATION THAT WAS "OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT": NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Limitation, Members Content, Striking out

The issue of non-payment, or under-payment, of court fees was considered by the Court of Appeal in the judgment today in  Butters & Anor v Hayes [2021] EWCA Civ 252. THE CASE During the course of an action the court…

← Previous 1 … 64 65 66 … 147 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

  • LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT…) AND THE COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS “WHAT IS A TRIAL?”: THE DEFINITION PROVES TO BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THIS APPELLANT…
  • COST BITES 417: THE LIABILITY FOR COSTS OF EACH CLAIMANT WHEN A MULTI-CLAIMANT ACTION WAS DISCONTINUED: BEING PART OF SUCH AN ACTION MAY NOT BE CHEAP…
  • EXPERT WATCH 63: WHEN A DOCTOR WRITES TO THE COURT AND THE JUDGE FINDS THE INFORMATION “UNRELIABLE”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “UNNECESSARY MATERIAL, DUPLICATION AND INFORMATION OVERLOAD”: A POST FROM JULY 2016 WHICH STILL HAS ECHOES TODAY
  • EXPERT WATCH 62: ANOTHER CASE WHERE THE EXPERT DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE “BOLAM” TEST: PLUS THE DANGERS OF INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT BY A “PORTAL”

Top Posts

WHAT SHOULD A SOLICITOR DO IF A CLIENT IS PUTTING FORWARD AN ACCOUNT THAT MAY BE UNTRUE AND THEN THERE ARE "RED FLAGS"? WHEN IS THE LINE CROSSED: THE DUTIES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL
"STING OPERATIONS", SECRET AGENTS, NAIVE SOLICITORS DISCLOSING THEIR CLIENT'S PRIVILEGED INFORMATION, STRIKING OUT AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION HIGHLIGHTS THE MAJOR RISKS OF "PRIVILEGE HUNTING"
THE RULES ARE CHANGING: ADVANCE NOTICE: GOODBYE TO THE CHANCERY DIVISION
CAN THE WAY IN WHICH A CLAIMANT HAS CONDUCTED A CASE MEAN THAT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE SUMMARY JUDGMENT: "CLEAN HANDS" AND OTHER EQUITABLE MAXIMS CONSIDERED
EXPERT WATCH 59: THE JUDGE IS CONCERNED THAT THE EXPERTS' SOURCES OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WERE NOT FULLY DISCLOSED: THIS HAS CONSEQUENCES...

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.