Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham.
Browse: Home » Adjournments
ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL IS A "LAST RESORT" (AND WILL RARELY OCCUR BECAUSE OF INABILITY OF SPECIFIC COUNSEL TO ATTEND)

ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL IS A “LAST RESORT” (AND WILL RARELY OCCUR BECAUSE OF INABILITY OF SPECIFIC COUNSEL TO ATTEND)

February 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Clinical Negligence, Experts

The judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in  Naylor v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 340 (QB) shows the difficulty of obtaining an adjournment of a trial date.    The judge rejected an application on the grounds of…

A PANDEMIC DOESN'T STOP YOU TICKING A BOX: DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT APPLICATION REFUSED

A PANDEMIC DOESN’T STOP YOU TICKING A BOX: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT APPLICATION REFUSED

November 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,

In Glenn v Kline [2020] EWHC 3182 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin refused the defendant’s application for an adjournment of an application for judgement in default of acknowledgement of service.  The reasons provided by the defendant, including COVID, did not provide…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: APPLICATION TO ADJOURN HEARING REFUSED: JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED

CORONAVIRUS LAW: APPLICATION TO ADJOURN HEARING REFUSED: JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED

June 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus

The decision of Mr Justice MacDonald today in Lancashire County Council v M & Ors (COVID-19 Adjournment Application) [2020] EWFC 43  is another case where an application to adjourn because of Covid concerns was refused. The judge held that an…

CORONAVIRUS LAW: DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO ADJOURN TRIAL REFUSED: TRIAL CAN GO AHEAD IN PERSON (AND WOULD GO AHEAD EVEN IF HELD REMOTELY)

CORONAVIRUS LAW: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO ADJOURN TRIAL REFUSED: TRIAL CAN GO AHEAD IN PERSON (AND WOULD GO AHEAD EVEN IF HELD REMOTELY)

June 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Coronavirus

In the judgment in  SC v University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (Rev 2) [2020] EWHC 1445 (QB) given yesterday Mr Justice Johnson refused the defendant’s application for an adjournment on the grounds that a trial held remotely would be…

APPLICATION TO ADJOURN REMOTE HEARING REFUSED: "Some people are much better at lying than others and that will be no different whether they do so remotely or in court"

APPLICATION TO ADJOURN REMOTE HEARING REFUSED: “Some people are much better at lying than others and that will be no different whether they do so remotely or in court”

May 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Coronavirus, Remote hearings

In the judgment given this morning in A Local Authority v Mother [2020] EWHC 1086 (Fam)  Mrs Justice Lieven considered the recent guidance on remote hearings and refused to adjourn an ongoing hearing. “We have had five days of evidence…

THE TRIAL WILL GO ON: JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT FIVE WEEK TRIAL HAD TO BE ADJOURNED BECAUSE OF COVID-19

THE TRIAL WILL GO ON: JUDGE REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT FIVE WEEK TRIAL HAD TO BE ADJOURNED BECAUSE OF COVID-19

April 8, 2020 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Civil Procedure, Coronavirus

In Blackfriars Ltd, Re [2020] EWHC 845 (Ch) Mr John Kimbell QC (sitting as a  Deputy High Court judge) refused an application to adjourn a trial made on the basis of the difficulties caused by coronavirus.  The judgment contains a…

DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION

DISCLOSURE OF SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE LATE: THE FACT THAT THE GENIE IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE IS NOT ENOUGH: AN INTERESTING HIGH COURT DECISION

January 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Extensions of time

  Angus Fergusson  has kindly sent me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in  Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813, it is an interesting case where the judge, on appeal, upheld a decision to refuse…

APPLYING FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A "CUT OUT AND KEEP" GUIDE TO THE AUTHORITIES

APPLYING FOR AN ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE TO THE AUTHORITIES

January 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Civil Procedure

It is surprising how often searches that lead to this blog are questions about seeking adjournments on the grounds of ill health.  This appears to be common issue.  A useful “cut out and keep” summary of the relevant authorities can…

DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL REFUSED: A PROBLEM OF THEIR OWN MAKING: THE TRIAL WILL GO AHEAD

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL REFUSED: A PROBLEM OF THEIR OWN MAKING: THE TRIAL WILL GO AHEAD

November 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Useful links

There is an interesting summary of   the decision in Mitchell -v- Precis 545 Ltd (15/11/2019)  on Kings Chambers website. A report by my colleague Jeremy Roussak of a case where he represented the claimant and where HHJ Freedman refused a…

CASES TAKEN OUT OF THE LIST AT THE LAST MINUTE BECAUSE OF "LACK OF JUDICIAL TIME": WHAT ARE THE CAUSES? YOU BE THE JUDGE

CASES TAKEN OUT OF THE LIST AT THE LAST MINUTE BECAUSE OF “LACK OF JUDICIAL TIME”: WHAT ARE THE CAUSES? YOU BE THE JUDGE

June 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments

Not for the first time I return to the matter of hearings being taken out of the list at the very last moment. This is a longstanding problem that is getting worse. There were reports last week of two sets…

TELEPHONE HEARINGS WHEN COUNSEL WON'T ANSWER THE TELEPHONE: THE  UNHAPPY LORD JUSTICE

TELEPHONE HEARINGS WHEN COUNSEL WON’T ANSWER THE TELEPHONE: THE UNHAPPY LORD JUSTICE

May 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Civil Procedure

There is a short judgment recently arrived on BAILLI which fits in well with the earlier post about telephone and electronic hearings. In Nixon & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 2694 Lord Justice…

BAD WEATHER MEANT COURT SHOULD HAVE GRANTED AN ADJOURNMENT: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

BAD WEATHER MEANT COURT SHOULD HAVE GRANTED AN ADJOURNMENT: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

December 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments, Applications

In Pari-Jones v CPS [2018] EWHC 3482 (Admin) the Administrative Court allowed an appeal against a decision not to adjourn a trial.  The magistrates’ court simply went ahead without referring to any of the relevant legal principles.   Although these were criminal…

MORE ON LAST MINUTE ADJOURNMENTS: SERIOUS CASES PULLED FROM THE LIST AT THE LAST MOMENT (AND CLAIMANTS HAVING TO PAY FOR THE PRIVILEGE OF EXTENDING THE LISTING PERIOD)

May 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Listing

I am continuing to collect issues relating to listing. Doing this by a serious of posts on the topic.  You can get a flavour of the problems by some of the issues raised on Twitter over the past few days. …

LISTING IN THE COUNTY COURT: AN EVERY DAY STORY OF EVER DAY FOLK: "WE'VE GOT NO JUDGES"

LISTING IN THE COUNTY COURT: AN EVERY DAY STORY OF EVER DAY FOLK: “WE’VE GOT NO JUDGES”

April 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Access to justice, Adjournments, Civil Procedure

Problems with listing are one of the hidden problems of civil procedure.  Hearings are listed and then pulled out at the last moment, often after the parties have arrived at court.  This is an issue that should be publicised.  It…

JUDGE WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH AND TO REFUSE TO SET ASIDE SUBSEQUENT JUDGMENT

JUDGE WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH AND TO REFUSE TO SET ASIDE SUBSEQUENT JUDGMENT

February 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Setting aside judgment

In Solanki v Intercity Telecom Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 101 today the Court of Appeal overturned a decision discussed on this blog in 2015.  The Court found that a judge should have granted a defendant an adjournment on ill-health grounds. He…

I WANT AN ADJOURNMENT BECAUSE I'M ILL: AN APPLICATION NOT GUARANTEED BE SUCCESSFUL

I WANT AN ADJOURNMENT BECAUSE I’M ILL: AN APPLICATION NOT GUARANTEED BE SUCCESSFUL

November 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Case Management

The issue of adjournments because of ill-health is one of the most common search terms that leads to this blog. (I am not certain whether to be surprised  at this or not). For those searching today the relevant principles are…

ADJOURNMENTS, ILL HEALTH, FAIRNESS AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS CASE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

ADJOURNMENTS, ILL HEALTH, FAIRNESS AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS CASE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS

March 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Relief from sanctions

In Dove -v- London Borough of Havering [2017] EWCA Civ 156 the Court of Appeal considered a number of procedural issues prior to giving judgment on the substantive point.  The defendants argued that they should have been granted an adjournment of…

LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

LATE SKELETON ARGUMENTS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

March 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Written advocacy

In Owgilo -v- The General Medical Council [2017] EWHC 419(Admin) Mr Justice Dove considered the situation when a witness statement was served late and the applicant requested an adjournment.  The overriding objective played a prominent part in the decisions made….

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, 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…

ADJOURNMENTS AND DISCRETION: DECISION NOT TO ADJOURN BANKRUPTCY PETITION UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

October 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Uncategorized

In Edginton -v- Sekhon [2015] EWCA Civ 816 the Court of Appeal refused to overturn the judge’s decision not to adjourn a bankruptcy petition. “Delay is inimical to all forms of litigation and especially so in a collective enforcement process…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2021. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 22,992 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
  • “WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF?” WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? 10 KEY POINTS RE-VISITED
  • SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: DELAY, FAILING TO KNOW THE CORRECT PROCEDURE AND ABSENCE OF MERITS: LORD CHANCELLOR WINS THE DAY…
  • “DENTON PROOFING” YOUR PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE – KNOWING WHERE THINGS GO WRONG AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT: WEBINAR 11th MARCH 2021
  • THE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ADMIRALTY CLAIMS: NEW RULES WILL APPLY

Top Posts & Pages

  • PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
  • SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: DELAY, FAILING TO KNOW THE CORRECT PROCEDURE AND ABSENCE OF MERITS: LORD CHANCELLOR WINS THE DAY...
  • "WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF?" WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? 10 KEY POINTS RE-VISITED
  • “DENTON PROOFING” YOUR PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE - KNOWING WHERE THINGS GO WRONG AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT: WEBINAR 11th MARCH 2021
  • THE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ADMIRALTY CLAIMS: NEW RULES WILL APPLY

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin