Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Admissions
SOLICITORS REFERRALS, TOMLIN ORDERS, UNLAWFUL TERMS, ADMISSIONS AND ATTEMPTS TO WITHDRAW FROM  THOSE ADMISSIONS: A LOT OF LEGAL LIFE IS HERE...

SOLICITORS REFERRALS, TOMLIN ORDERS, UNLAWFUL TERMS, ADMISSIONS AND ATTEMPTS TO WITHDRAW FROM THOSE ADMISSIONS: A LOT OF LEGAL LIFE IS HERE…

March 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There have been many interesting cases relating to “admissions” on this site. Here we have a intriguing case relating to a solicitor’s dispute with a former member of staff. It involves Tomlin orders which were partially unlawful, admissions and attempts…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 58:  THE DEFENDANTS' PLEADING DID NOT CONTAIN AN "ADMISSION": APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMENDMENTS DISMISSED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 58: THE DEFENDANTS’ PLEADING DID NOT CONTAIN AN “ADMISSION”: APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMENDMENTS DISMISSED

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This is a case where the court had to consider whether a defence had originally contained an “admission”  such that the defendants required express permission to resile from it.  The court found that, on close analysis, there was no such…

SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION MADE BY MISTAKE? A TEN YEAR OLD CASE THAT IS STILL OF INTEREST: CANDOUR HELPS A LOT

SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION MADE BY MISTAKE? A TEN YEAR OLD CASE THAT IS STILL OF INTEREST: CANDOUR HELPS A LOT

October 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

This is a case about mistakes in litigation and the rules relating to allowing the withdrawal of a pre-action admission.  The judgment was given 10 years ago, but arrived on BAILII today.  The issues raised here remain highly relevant.  In…

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION MADE IN THE PORTAL: ON CONDITION THAT INTERIM PAYMENTS WOULD NOT BE REPAID

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION MADE IN THE PORTAL: ON CONDITION THAT INTERIM PAYMENTS WOULD NOT BE REPAID

April 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to  solicitor Stratos Gatzouris from DWF law   for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Catherine Brown in the case of Jerrom -v- Serco Leisure Operating Ltd (Canterbury County Court 12th February 2023). It is an…

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO PURSUE CLAIM AGAINST ONE DEFENDANT BUT NOT THE OTHER: WHAT A DIFFERENCE AN ADMISSION MAKES

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO PURSUE CLAIM AGAINST ONE DEFENDANT BUT NOT THE OTHER: WHAT A DIFFERENCE AN ADMISSION MAKES

March 14, 2024 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

In  Bangs v FM Conway Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 494 (Comm) Mr Justice Jacobs considered the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when the particulars of claim had been served late.  He allowed the claimant’s application against one defendant…

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, Members Content, 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, Members Content, 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, Members Content, 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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content, 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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content

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, Members Content, 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, Members Content

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, Members Content, 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, Members Content, 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, 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…

DEFENDANT NOT ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION AND DEBARRED FROM RELYING ON FURTHER EVIDENCE: PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT

November 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Clark -v- Braintree Clinical Services Limited [2015] EWHC 3181 HH Judge Burrell QC  (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a defendant’s application to resile from an admission. He also granted the claimant’s application to debar the defendant from…

AN OFFER IS NOT AN ADMISSION: HIGH COURT REJECTS APPLICATION FOR JUDGMENT ON ADMISSIONS

October 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Admissions, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The previous post looked at the decision Mr Justice Coulson in The Dorchester Group Ltd -v- Kier Construction Limited [2015] EWHC 3051 (TCC) in relation to disclosure.  Here we look at the decision in relation to the claimant’s application for…

THAT "PARTIAL" ADMISSION: IT IS STILL BINDING AND YOU MAY NOT BE ALLOWED TO RESILE FROM IT

July 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice William Davis in Cavell -v- Transport for London [2015] EWCA 2283 (QB) has some important observations in relation to admissions and attempts to resile from admissions. “It cannot be in those interests to permit the…

IT IS NOT THAT EASY TO WITHDRAW AN ADMISSION: McWILLIAM -v- NORTON FINANCE

March 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In McWilliam -v- Norton Finance [2015] EWCA Civ 186 the Court of Appeal made some important observations in relation to admissions and the withdrawal of admissions. THE CASE The claimant was suing the defendant for secret commissions. The defendant argued…

ADMISSION UNDER THE PROTOCOL AND PORTAL MAY NOT BE BINDING IN SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDINGS

December 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Is an admission made by an insurer under the Portal binding on the parties in  a future action? In September last year we looked at the case of Ullah -v- Jon where a district judge held that an admission was…

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

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)

Top Posts

  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE "A GREAT MYSTERY" TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS...)
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: "THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES..."

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.