Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Abuse of process
THE DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DANGERS OF TRYING SIMILAR THINGS A SECOND TIME AROUND: "THE HENDERSON AND HUNTER PRINCIPLES APPLY TO INTERLOCUTORY HEARINGS AS MUCH AS TO FINAL HEARINGS"

THE DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DANGERS OF TRYING SIMILAR THINGS A SECOND TIME AROUND: “THE HENDERSON AND HUNTER PRINCIPLES APPLY TO INTERLOCUTORY HEARINGS AS MUCH AS TO FINAL HEARINGS”

March 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This is an interesting case on the relevance of the “Henderson” principles to applications, in this case for reverse summary judgment/to strike out the claim.  A similar application had been made much earlier in the litigation.  The judge found for…

ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE ISSUES OF OWNERSHIP WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE SAME ARGUMENT RAN TWICE (UNSUCCESSFULLY ON BOTH OCCASIONS...)

ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE ISSUES OF OWNERSHIP WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE SAME ARGUMENT RAN TWICE (UNSUCCESSFULLY ON BOTH OCCASIONS…)

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we consider an argument that it was an abuse of process for a litigant to argue issues that were directly related to another action between the parties that had been stayed.  The judge held that this was not an…

WAS THIS "SECOND" ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

WAS THIS “SECOND” ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

January 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

When a party is dissatisfied with the result of a hearing and has exhausted the appeal process there is often little they can do.  One potential remedy is to bring a second action seeking to set aside the first on…

A FINAL TRIBUTE TO DISTRICT JUDGE GEORGE BRANCHFLOWER: A JUDGMENT WHICH GOT A MENTION AT HIS FUNERAL TODAY

A FINAL TRIBUTE TO DISTRICT JUDGE GEORGE BRANCHFLOWER: A JUDGMENT WHICH GOT A MENTION AT HIS FUNERAL TODAY

August 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure

Today I attended the funeral of District Judge George Branchflower.  I have written briefly about him before.  At his funeral we heard tributes from those who knew him best including a touching tribute from his daughter and a wonderful song…

COST BITES 265: THE PERILS OF WORKING UNDER A CFA: THE COSTS JUDGE CORRECTLY ASSESSED COSTS AT NIL: THE DEFENDANT WAS ENTITLED TO TAKE A POINT THAT WAS NOT TAKEN AT AN EARLIER HEARING: THEY WERE SIMPLY FOLLOWING THE COURT'S ORDERS

COST BITES 265: THE PERILS OF WORKING UNDER A CFA: THE COSTS JUDGE CORRECTLY ASSESSED COSTS AT NIL: THE DEFENDANT WAS ENTITLED TO TAKE A POINT THAT WAS NOT TAKEN AT AN EARLIER HEARING: THEY WERE SIMPLY FOLLOWING THE COURT’S ORDERS

August 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we have a case that could well bring tears to the eyes of any litigator who works on a conditional fee basis.  For the second time, on appeal, the claimant solicitor’s costs have been unsuccessful.  The defendant former client…

THE NEED FOR COURT APPROVAL IN A FATAL ACCIDENT CASE INVOLVING CHILDREN: SUBSEQUENT ACTION FOR PERSONAL INJURY IS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

THE NEED FOR COURT APPROVAL IN A FATAL ACCIDENT CASE INVOLVING CHILDREN: SUBSEQUENT ACTION FOR PERSONAL INJURY IS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

November 24, 2023 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Costs, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Pepperall in  Bayless & Ors v Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 2986 (KB) provides a warning, to both claimants and defendants, that offers under the Fatal Accidents Act, that involve…

A SECOND ACTION ON A DIFFERENT ISSUE TO THE FIRST SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO KEEN ON "SHADOW BOXING" IN CIVIL LITIGATION

A SECOND ACTION ON A DIFFERENT ISSUE TO THE FIRST SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO KEEN ON “SHADOW BOXING” IN CIVIL LITIGATION

November 6, 2023 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Orji & Anor v Nagra & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 1289 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that an action should be struck out as an abuse of process.  The Court rejected the defendant’s contention that the action…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT “UNMANAGEABLE” COURT PROCEEDINGS

July 11, 2022 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Case Management, Members Content

In Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 951 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision to strike out a claim.    The Court doubted whether an action could ever be described…

“NO SERIOUS PRIVATE PAYING LITIGANT” WOULD CONTEMPLATE SPENDING £50,000 IN COSTS FOR A £3,000 CLAIM: ACTION SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN ISSUED IN THE HIGH COURT

November 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

In Johnson v Eastlight Community Homes Ltd [2021] EWHC 3069 (QB) Master Thornett accepted, in large part, a defendant’s application in a case where a claim for £3,000 had been issued in the High Court and the costs claimed by…

THE DANGEROUS USE OF "PRECEDENTS": WHEN 28 DIVORCE PETITIONS MAKE IDENTICAL ALLEGATIONS THEN SOMETHING IS NOT QUITE RIGHT..

THE DANGEROUS USE OF “PRECEDENTS”: WHEN 28 DIVORCE PETITIONS MAKE IDENTICAL ALLEGATIONS THEN SOMETHING IS NOT QUITE RIGHT..

October 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Moor in Yorston & Ors, Re (Matrimonial Causes Act 1973: Improper Petitions) [2021] EWFC 80 makes interesting reading.  The judge was considering a referral from a court which found that 28 divorce petitions, based on…

DELAY IN PURSUING PROCEEDINGS IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: LOCAL AUTHORITY’S INSOUCIENCE A CAUSE FOR CONCERN

October 4, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content

In London Borough of Havering & Ors v Persons Unknown & Ors [2021] EWHC 2648 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin had some clear warnings to give in relation to cases where local authorities had failed to pursue cases promptly after obtaining…

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO PURSUE POINTLESS COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: "THE DISPROPORTIONATE PURSUIT OF POINTLESS LITIGATION IS AN ABUSE"

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO PURSUE POINTLESS COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: “THE DISPROPORTIONATE PURSUIT OF POINTLESS LITIGATION IS AN ABUSE”

September 21, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Committal proceedings, Members Content

In Pharmagona Ltd v Taheri & Anor [2021] EWHC 2537 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden refused an application by a claimant to issue an application for committal.  A breach, if established, would be of the most technical kind. Further the defendants…

PERSONAL INJURY ACTION BROUGHT AFTER EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL SETTLEMENT NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT HAS GOT WHAT IT SIGNED UP TO…

September 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Farnham-Oliver v RM Educational Resources Ltd [2021] EWHC 2418 (QB) Master Dagnall rejected an argument that personal injury proceedings, brought after employment proceedings had been settled, were an abuse of process. The settlement agreement had specifically stated that it…

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 TORT OF "BRINGING PROCEEDINGS FOR AN IMPROPER PURPOSE": MAY STILL BE ALIVE, BUT NOT VERY WELL...

THE TORT OF “BRINGING PROCEEDINGS FOR AN IMPROPER PURPOSE”: MAY STILL BE ALIVE, BUT NOT VERY WELL…

February 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Andrew Lenon QC in  Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2021] EWHC 325 (Ch) contains a detailed consideration of the tort of “bringing proceedings for an improper purpose”. This tort (may well) still exist, however…

USING PART 8 PROCEEDINGS INSTEAD OF APPEALING IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: A TAXING ISSUE OF SOME INTEREST

USING PART 8 PROCEEDINGS INSTEAD OF APPEALING IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: A TAXING ISSUE OF SOME INTEREST

February 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Members Content

In Revenue And Customs v MCX Dunlin (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 186 the Court of Appeal held that the use of Part 8 proceedings, rather than a statutory route of appeal was an abuse of process. “… it seems…

STRIKING OUT A MULTI-PARTY CASE AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: WHEN CASE MANAGEMENT IS "AKIN TO TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE OF CARDS IN A WIND TUNNEL"

STRIKING OUT A MULTI-PARTY CASE AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: WHEN CASE MANAGEMENT IS “AKIN TO TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE OF CARDS IN A WIND TUNNEL”

November 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Members Content, Striking out

Returning to the substantive issue in the judgment of Turner J in Município De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group Plc & Anor [2020] EWHC 2930 (TCC). The judge struck out the claims of 202,600 claimants on the grounds that…

CASE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF THE ABSENCE OF A LETTER BEFORE ACTION AND INCORRECT USE OF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE

CASE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF THE ABSENCE OF A LETTER BEFORE ACTION AND INCORRECT USE OF THE PART 8 PROCEDURE

August 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Members Content, Striking out

In Halal Meat Sellers Committee Ltd & Anor v HMC (UK) Ltd [2020] EWHC 2190 (Comm) the court struck out the claimants’ claim as an abuse of process. It is interesting to note that the court indicated that there were…

USING RTA PROTOCOL AND PART 8 PROCEDURE INAPPROPRIATELY DID NOT LEAD TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

USING RTA PROTOCOL AND PART 8 PROCEDURE INAPPROPRIATELY DID NOT LEAD TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

July 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Members Content, Striking out

The Court of Appeal today gave judgment in Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1015 and overturned the decision to strike out an action because it had been issued inappropriately using the portal and Part 8…

HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT CLAIMANT'S PERSONAL INJURY ACTION (AND CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AS WELL)

HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT CLAIMANT’S PERSONAL INJURY ACTION (AND CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AS WELL)

July 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury, Striking out

In Akay v Newcastle University [2020] EWHC 1669 (QB) Mr Justice Lavender upheld an earlier decision that a personal injury action be struck out as an abuse of process.   “If it was to be alleged that the judge failed…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: "WAREHOUSING" A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “WAREHOUSING” A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)

January 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In the judgment today in Alibrahim v Asturion Fondation [2020] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the court should not have struck out a claim that had been left dormant for a period. “Striking out was a…

A SECOND - IDENTICAL - APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS AND DISMISSED ON THAT GROUND ALONE

A SECOND – IDENTICAL – APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS AND DISMISSED ON THAT GROUND ALONE

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  Lambert v Forest of Dean District Council & Ors [2019] EWHC 1763 (Ch) ICC Judge Mullen rejected an application on the grounds that it was an abuse of process. An identical application had been made earlier and struck out…

SECOND ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIM IN DECEIT CAN CONTINUE AFTER CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE FAILED: THE CLAIMANT NEED NOT HAVE GAMBLED ON FRAUD CLAIM FIRST TIME AROUND

SECOND ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIM IN DECEIT CAN CONTINUE AFTER CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE FAILED: THE CLAIMANT NEED NOT HAVE GAMBLED ON FRAUD CLAIM FIRST TIME AROUND

September 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Second set of proceedings

In Playboy Club London Ltd v Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Spa [2018] EWCA Civ 2025 the Court of Appeal overturned a ruling that an action in deceit was an abuse of process. The claimant’s action in negligence failed because there was…

THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT CANNOT PAY A JUDGMENT DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT

THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT CANNOT PAY A JUDGMENT DOES NOT MAKE THE ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANT GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT

September 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Summary judgment

In Caribonum Pension Trustee Ltd & Anor v Pelikan Hardcopy Production AG [2018] EWHC 2321 (Ch) Master Clark rejected an argument that the fact that a defendant was never going to be able to pay a judgment meant that the action…

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THEY ARE ISSUED AND SERVED BY AN UNAUTHORISED ENTITY? TWO CASES THAT AID THE CLAIMANT

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THEY ARE ISSUED AND SERVED BY AN UNAUTHORISED ENTITY? TWO CASES THAT AID THE CLAIMANT

August 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Striking out

The judgment of HHJ Worster  In Kassam -v- Gill (13th August 2018, County Court at Birmingham) is available on Lawtel. There are several procedural aspects of that case that are of general interest and which I will look at over…

THE DANGER OF ISSUING UNDER PART 8 AND THEN DOING VERY LITTLE: COURT UPHOLDS REFUSAL TO LIFT STAY: ACTION STRUCK OUT

THE DANGER OF ISSUING UNDER PART 8 AND THEN DOING VERY LITTLE: COURT UPHOLDS REFUSAL TO LIFT STAY: ACTION STRUCK OUT

January 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Relief from sanctions, RTA Protocol, Sanctions

I am grateful to barrister Richard Whitehall for sending me a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Pearce in the case of Lyle -v- Allianz Insurance plc (Liverpool CC 21st December 2017). It is a case that illustrates…

SECOND ACTION NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COURT RESOURCES DOES NOT "TRUMP THE OVERRIDING NEED TO DO JUSTICE"

SECOND ACTION NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COURT RESOURCES DOES NOT “TRUMP THE OVERRIDING NEED TO DO JUSTICE”

December 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Second set of proceedings

In Davies v Carillion Energy Services Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 3206 (QB) Mr Justice Morris upheld a finding that a second claim brought by the claimant was not an abuse of process.  “…even post-Jackson, ultimately, the importance of the efficient…

LEGAL QUACKERY & AN "OVERWHELMING MIASMA OF FAKE LAW" : OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE AND OBSTRUCTING THE COURT SYSTEM

LEGAL QUACKERY & AN “OVERWHELMING MIASMA OF FAKE LAW” : OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE AND OBSTRUCTING THE COURT SYSTEM

November 29, 2017 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Access to justice, Members Content, Witness statements

I usually confine this blog to cases relating to the law in England and Wales. However the judgment of  Noonan J in Bank of Ireland Mortgage Bank -v- Martin & anor [2017] IEHC 707 was brought to my attention by an…

NOT PROCEEDING WITH LITIGATION FOR ONE YEAR IS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE ACTION WAS NOT BEING "WAREHOUSED": BUT STILL A POINT TO WATCH

NOT PROCEEDING WITH LITIGATION FOR ONE YEAR IS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE ACTION WAS NOT BEING “WAREHOUSED”: BUT STILL A POINT TO WATCH

October 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content

In Grenda Investments Ltd v Barton [2017] EWHC 2371 (Comm)Mr Justice Picken considered (and rejected) an argument that the claimant’s failure to proceed with litigation for a year amounted to an abuse of process.  Although the application failed this case does…

ADVERSE DECISION IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS DID NOT RENDER AN ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COURT OF APPEAL REVERSED STRIKING OUT DECISION

January 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Striking out

 In Michael Wilson & Partners -v- Sinclair [2017] EWCA Civ 3 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision to strike out the claimant’s case.  The fact that there had been earlier arbitration proceedings did not, in this case,  render a second…

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: ANOTHER CASE

January 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Limitation, Members Content, Sanctions, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

There is a brief report on  Browne Jacobson Insurance Law about a case that struck out because of a failure to pay the correct fees. THE REPORT The report is brief and does not give the date of the judgment…

DELAY AND NON-COMPLIANCE: ACTION STRUCK OUT: A "GAME CHANGER"

January 4, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Uncategorized

The judgment of Master Matthew in Phelps -v- Button [2016] EWHC 3185 (Ch) emphasises the dangers of delay and non compliance. “…I will observe that the Court ethos has changed enormously since the days of Lord Denning and the two…

SECOND APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS (THIS TIME)

November 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Holyoake -v- Candy [2016] EWHC 3065 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee decided that a second application for security for costs was not an abuse of process.  The judgment reviews the law relating to second applications and abuse in detail. It…

THE ALDI PRINCIPLE AND SECOND ACTIONS: A STING IN THE TAIL

November 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Second set of proceedings, Uncategorized

In Chamonix Private Equity LLP -v- Caledonia Investments plc [2015] EWHC 3290 (Comm) Mr Justice Knowles noted that, in the absence of prior notification, it was going to be difficult for a claimant to bring a second action against different…

TYPE IN HASTE, REPENT AT LEISURE: SOME EXAMPLES FROM LITIGATION: "CHURN THAT BILL, BABY"

September 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Uncategorized

If you write something down, particularly on a computer, it has the potential to come back and bite you.  It can bite you even if you think the communication is privileged or between colleagues. There are several cases in which…

DELAY AND STRIKING OUT FOR ABUSE OF PROCESS: SOME INTERESTING LESSONS

September 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Master Bowles in Solland International Ltd -v- Clifford Harris & Co [2015] EWHC 2018 (Ch) contains several matters of interest to litigators. Not only the fact that the action was struck out but some of the allegations…

BANKRUPTCY OF CLAIMANT DID NOT RENDER ACTION INVALID OR AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

August 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Eaton -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC (30th April 2015) (reported today on Bailli) His Honour Judge Keyser QC had to consider the effect of bankruptcy upon the validity of a claim. “It is remarkable that the case had proceeded…

QOCS, STRIKING OUT AND THE LIABILITY TO PAY IN FULL: A COUNTY COURT DECISION

August 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Colm Nugent of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me a copy of the judgment in Wall -v- British Canoe Union. A decision of HH Judge Lopez in Birmingham County Court on the 30th July 2015.  The judgment…

ALDI; "SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS" AND ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIMANTS ALLOWED TO SHOP AROUND?

August 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Knowles DEB in Otkritie Capital International Ltd -v- Threadneedle Asset Management Ltd [2015] EWHC 2329 (Comm) contains some important observations for all those involved in litigation, particularly commercial litigation.  It also provides a reminder that…

SETTING ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE IN A QOCS CASE: TWO INTERESTING DECISIONS

July 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, QOCS

I am grateful to Rebecca Jones of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me details of an important decision in relation to setting aside a notice of discontinuance served by a claimant in a costs case. The note of the judgment below…

SOLICITORS ARE ENTITLED TO ARGUE THEY SHOULD BE PAID AND ARE NOT LITIGANTS IN PERSON: A HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

July 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In EMW Law LLP -v- Halborg [2015] EWHC 2005 (Ch) His Honour Judge Purle QC considered some important elements in relation to the ability of solicitors to recover their costs. The judge also found that solicitors are not “litigants in person”…

MAKING A FINDING OF FRAUD WITHOUT EVIDENCE 3: THE COURTS ARE NOT EASILY AFFRONTED

July 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

For the third time in a fortnight the courts have sent out a clear message of the dangers of  judges making findings of fraud without having all the evidence to hand. THE CASE In Alpha Rocks Solicitors -v- Alade [2015]…

MAKING FINDINGS OF FRAUD WITHOUT A PARTY BEING REPRESENTED 2: A HEARING IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

June 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In MRH Solicitors -v- The County Court sitting at Manchester [2015] EWHC 1795 (Admin) the Administrative Court, in essence, overturned findings of fraud against solicitors who had not been notified of the allegations and not given any opportunity to respond….

AMENDING PLEADINGS: WELL I'M JUST GOING TO ISSUE SEPARATE PROCEEDINGS – IS THAT RELEVANT?

May 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The earlier post looked at the general principles in relation to late amendment of pleadings. There was one further point considered in CIP Properties -v- Galliford Try [2015] EWHC 135 (TCC). The claimant argued that the amendments should be allowed…

"FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY" A ROUND UP OF CASES & COMMENTARY

May 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Risks of litigation, Useful links

The earlier post on the procedural aspects of “fundamental” dishonesty led to the most visitors to the blog in a weekend ever.  Here we look at posts, articles, comments and cases in relation to the concept of fundamental dishonesty. REPORTED…

"FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY" AND STRIKING OUT IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: TEN KEY PROCEDURAL POINTS

May 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The rule as to “fundamental” dishonesty has attracted a lot of attraction (and a lot of heated debate). However there has been very little examination of the details of the Act and the consequent procedural implications.  There are 10 key…

PLEADING, PARTICULARITY, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND STRIKING OUT: WAIT UNTIL AFTER DISCLOSURE

April 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Dellal -v- Dellal [2015] EWHC 907 (Fam) Mr Justice Mostyn made some important observations about the need for particularity in pleading THE CASE The claimant was bringing an action  under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975…

WHEN YOU GET BACK TO WORK ON TUESDAY THERE ARE NEW CHANGES TO THE PRE ACTION PROTOCOLS IN FORCE: AND YOU MAY STRUGGLE TO FIND THEM

April 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Rule Changes

If new rules are important you would think that great time and effort would be spent in making sure that practitioners had plenty of advance notice and they were readily available for study and consideration before they came into force….

SIGNING DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS? REMEMBER YOU CAN GO TO PRISON: OTKRITIE CONSIDERED

March 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content

In Oktritie International -v- Gersamia and Jemai [2014] EWHC 821 (Comm) a respondent to the action was sentenced to 20 months imprisonment.  Part of that committal was relating to forgery. However important observations were made about the disclosure statement. THE…

FOOTBALL, SEX, INJUNCTIONS AND MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE: BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET ON THE JUDGE'S OFFSIDE

March 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In YXB -v- TNO Mr Justice Warby set out the importance of full and frank disclosure on parties making an application for an ex-parte injunction.  It also reiterates the importance of claimants giving direct evidence whenever possible and the dangers…

1 2 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

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS’S OWN WORDS?
  • FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: A TALE OF THREE CITIES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE APPEAL WAS LATE BUT THE SOLICITORS “DID NOTHING WRONG AT ALL”
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE “INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED”
  • COST BITES 381: DOES THE COURT HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN RELATION TO AN ASSESSMENT? SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT ALONG THE WAY…
  • SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)

Top Posts

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS'S OWN WORDS?
  • SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE "INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED"
  • COST BITES 381: DOES THE COURT HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN RELATION TO AN ASSESSMENT? SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT ALONG THE WAY...
  • FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: A TALE OF THREE CITIES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE APPEAL WAS LATE BUT THE SOLICITORS "DID NOTHING WRONG AT ALL"

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.