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. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Admissions
NEW RULES AS TO ADMISSIONS: READ THEM HERE: IN FORCE 1st OCTOBER 2023

NEW RULES AS TO ADMISSIONS: READ THEM HERE: IN FORCE 1st OCTOBER 2023

September 14, 2023 · by gexall · in Admissions, Civil Procedure, Rule Changes

The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.3) Rules 2023 introduce a “new” Part 14 on admissions.  The is not to make any substantial changes but are part of a process of simplifying the rules.  So, for instance, the criteria for seeking to…

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: PRE-INQUEST ADMISSIONS FATAL TO DEFENDANT'S CASE

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: PRE-INQUEST ADMISSIONS FATAL TO DEFENDANT’S CASE

February 9, 2023 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Clinical Negligence, Personal Injury

I am grateful to barrister Jo Moore for drawing my attention to the judgment of Master Sullivan in  Somoye v North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust [2023] EWHC 191 (KB).  This is a case where the Master refused the defendant’s…

VERY LATE APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSIONS REFUSED: ADMISSIONS MADE IN REPLY REMAINED BINDING

VERY LATE APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSIONS REFUSED: ADMISSIONS MADE IN REPLY REMAINED BINDING

June 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Statements of Case

I am grateful to John De Waal QC for pointing out the procedural aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Edwin Johnson in Valley View Health Centre (a firm) & Ors v NHS Property Services Ltd [2022] EWHC 1393 (Ch)….

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 92: RESILING FROM ADMISSIONS - A SUMMARY OF THE LAW

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 92: RESILING FROM ADMISSIONS – A SUMMARY OF THE LAW

December 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Appeals

The judgment of Master Stevens in  Shah v London Borough of Barnet [2021] EWHC 2631 (QB) provides an essential summary of the rules and case law in relation to resiling from admissions.   The decision itself was looked at in an…

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RESILE FROM ADMISSION: GRANTING THE APPLICATION WOULD "REFLECT BADLY ON THE JUSTICE SYSTEM"

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RESILE FROM ADMISSION: GRANTING THE APPLICATION WOULD “REFLECT BADLY ON THE JUSTICE SYSTEM”

December 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications

In  Shah v London Borough of Barnet [2021] EWHC 2631 (QB) Master Stevens refused the defendant’s application for permission to resile from a pre-action admission. “On the particular facts of this case, I believe it would reflect poorly on the…

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM AN ADMISSION: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION OF HIGH COURT JUDGE

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM AN ADMISSION: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION OF HIGH COURT JUDGE

July 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure

In J v A South Wales Local Authority [2021] EWCA Civ 1102 the Court of Appeal upheld an earlier decision refusing a defendant permission to resile from an admission. “There is no doubt that the checklist at paragraph 7.2 is…

DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS REFUSED: NO EVIDENCE THAT DEFENCE WAS NOT CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BY THE LEGAL ADVISERS WITH THE DEFENDANTS

DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS REFUSED: NO EVIDENCE THAT DEFENCE WAS NOT CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BY THE LEGAL ADVISERS WITH THE DEFENDANTS

May 24, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Applications

The judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Financial Conduct Authority v Skinner & Ors [2019] EWHC 392 has only recently arrived on BAILLI. It is an example of the court refusing to allow a party to withdraw from admissions.  The…

GENERAL RESPONSE IN A REPLY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO AN ADMISSION: HIGH COURT DECISION

GENERAL RESPONSE IN A REPLY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO AN ADMISSION: HIGH COURT DECISION

April 6, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Statements of Case

In Berkeley Square Holdings Ltd & Ors v Lancer Property Assets Management Ltd & Ors (Claimant amendment application) (Rev 1) [2021] EWHC 750 (Ch) Mr Robin Vos (sitting as a judge of the Chancery Division) rejected an argument that a…

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: "THE WHOLE POINT OF THINGS BEING ADMITTED IS THAT PARTIES CAN MOVE ON AND NOT BE BOTHERED WITH INVESTIGATING SUCH MATTERS"

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: “THE WHOLE POINT OF THINGS BEING ADMITTED IS THAT PARTIES CAN MOVE ON AND NOT BE BOTHERED WITH INVESTIGATING SUCH MATTERS”

January 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications

In Advinia Care Homes Ltd v (1) BUPA Care Homes Investments (Holdings) Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 1563 (Ch) Mr Michael Green QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a claimant’s application to withdraw from an admission. “The whole…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 86: PRE-ACTION ADMISSIONS: THE DANGERS OF NOT MAKING THEM AND THE CONSEQUENCES IF YOU DO

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 86: PRE-ACTION ADMISSIONS: THE DANGERS OF NOT MAKING THEM AND THE CONSEQUENCES IF YOU DO

September 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Admissions, Civil Procedure

The judgment in Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service v Veevers [2020] EWHC 2550 (Comm) HHJ Pearce emphasises the point that a party can make a formal pre-action admission.  A party who tries an alternative “non-formal” admission may well not get…

JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE GRANTED DEFENDANT PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: CHANGE OF LAW DID NOT JUSTIFY CHANGE OF STANCE

JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE GRANTED DEFENDANT PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: CHANGE OF LAW DID NOT JUSTIFY CHANGE OF STANCE

September 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Admissions, Civil Procedure

In the judgment today in J v A South Wales Local Authority [2020] EWHC 2362 (Admin) Mr Justice Marcus Smith overturned a decision granting a defendant permission to withdraw admissions. “ changes in the law are to be anticipated, particularly…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (7): WITHDRAWING FROM ADMISSIONS (AND ANOTHER CHANCE TO PAY HOMAGE TO GUIDE DOG RALPH)

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (7): WITHDRAWING FROM ADMISSIONS (AND ANOTHER CHANCE TO PAY HOMAGE TO GUIDE DOG RALPH)

December 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Civil Procedure

There have been relatively few cases about applications to withdraw from admissions this year. Interestingly most of them have been refusing applications to withdraw.  However the main point of this post is to pay homage to Guide Dog Ralph, who…

"PLEADINGS ARE NOT A GAME OF LUDO": TESCO REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION

“PLEADINGS ARE NOT A GAME OF LUDO”: TESCO REFUSED PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION

December 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Civil Procedure

In SL Claimants v Tesco Plc [2019] EWHC 3312 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard refused an application by Tesco PLC to withdraw an admission.   There is a detailed consideration of the factors to be considered when a party seeks permission to…

RESILING FROM ADMISSIONS - ISN'T THAT EASY : WITH A HOMAGE TO  THE WIT AND WISDOM OF  RALPH GUIDE DOG (RETIRED)

RESILING FROM ADMISSIONS – ISN’T THAT EASY : WITH A HOMAGE TO THE WIT AND WISDOM OF RALPH GUIDE DOG (RETIRED)

May 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Appeals, Applications

I got nudged into writing this post on withdrawing from admissions by  Ralph Guide Dog, (Retired).   So, especially for Ralph – who has always taken a keen interest in all things legal,  the latest High Court decision on resiling from…

LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND DEFENCE AND WITHDRAW ADMISSION REFUSED: EVE OF TRIAL APPLICATIONS USUALLY CAUSE PROBLEMS

LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND DEFENCE AND WITHDRAW ADMISSION REFUSED: EVE OF TRIAL APPLICATIONS USUALLY CAUSE PROBLEMS

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Applications

There is a second reason to look at the judgment today  by Mr Justice Arnold in Freshasia Foods Ltd v Lu [2019] EWHC 638 (Ch).  There was a decision in the judgment on a late application to amend and withdraw from an admission. …

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 12: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 12: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL

August 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Admissions, Civil Procedure, Statements of Case

Some defences adopt a scattergun approach of “denying” everything.  Some are more selective – they “put the Claimant to strict proof”.  Many defences ignore the important distinction between a non-admission and a denial. THE DIFFERENCE IN A NUTSHELL If you…

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION: CHANGE IN VALUE OF THE CLAIM IS A RELEVANT CRITERIA

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION: CHANGE IN VALUE OF THE CLAIM IS A RELEVANT CRITERIA

December 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Admissions, Appeals

An earlier post looked at the decision in Wood -v- Days Health UK Ltd & Others [2016] WHC 1079 (QB) where a defendant was refused permission to withdraw from an admission.  That decision was overturned by the Court of Appeal in Wood…

DEFENDANT'S ADMISSION IS BINDING: BUT PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION GRANTED: HIGH COURT DECISION

DEFENDANT’S ADMISSION IS BINDING: BUT PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION GRANTED: HIGH COURT DECISION

June 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Applications, RTA Protocol

In Blake -v- Croasdale [2017] EWHC 1336 (QB) His Honour Judge Purle QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) decided that an admission made by insurers was a binding admission. However he granted permission to resile from that…

A "DEFENCE STRAIGHT OUT OF THE 1970S": DEFENDANT'S PLEADINGS 40 YEARS OUT OF DATE

A “DEFENCE STRAIGHT OUT OF THE 1970S”: DEFENDANT’S PLEADINGS 40 YEARS OUT OF DATE

May 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Statements of Case

Some defences are inadequate. Some are (rightly) struck out. Some do not recognise the essential difference between a non-admission  and a denial. A series of denials is, the case law makes clear, an inappropriate and archaic way of proceeding. “Churchill’s…

APPLICATION TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION REFUSED: SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED

May 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Conduct, 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…

1 2 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2023. 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 32.7K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • NEW YEAR NEW HOURLY RATES: INDEXED LINK UPLIFT OF RATES FROM 1st JANUARY 2024: SEE THEM HERE
  • CLAIM FORM SENT TO DEFENDANT’S OLD REGISTERED OFFICE NOT PROPERLY SERVED: CLAIMANT WAS NOT INSULATED AGAINST THE MISTAKES OF THEIR SOLICITORS
  • SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASES: THE PAST 14 MONTHS: ANOTHER SEASON OF THE DREARY & UNLOVELY CROP OF PROCEDURAL SERVICE ISSUES
  • A KNOTTY PROBLEM: CAN THE COURT STAY PROCEEDINGS AND ORDER THE PARTIES TO ENGAGE IN ADR? YES IT CAN … BUT…
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT

Top Posts & Pages

  • NEW YEAR NEW HOURLY RATES: INDEXED LINK UPLIFT OF RATES FROM 1st JANUARY 2024: SEE THEM HERE
  • CLAIM FORM SENT TO DEFENDANT'S OLD REGISTERED OFFICE NOT PROPERLY SERVED: CLAIMANT WAS NOT INSULATED AGAINST THE MISTAKES OF THEIR SOLICITORS
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT
  • A KNOTTY PROBLEM: CAN THE COURT STAY PROCEEDINGS AND ORDER THE PARTIES TO ENGAGE IN ADR? YES IT CAN ... BUT...
  • SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASES: THE PAST 14 MONTHS: ANOTHER SEASON OF THE DREARY & UNLOVELY CROP OF PROCEDURAL SERVICE ISSUES

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

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2023
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • 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 © 2023 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin

 

Loading Comments...