Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Appeals
SERVICE POINTS 35: HOT OFF THE PRESS:  THE HIGH COURT UPHOLDS INITIAL FINDING THAT AN ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED AND SUBSQUENTLY AMENDED CLAIM FORM DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RE-SEALED PRIOR TO SERVICE

SERVICE POINTS 35: HOT OFF THE PRESS: THE HIGH COURT UPHOLDS INITIAL FINDING THAT AN ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED AND SUBSQUENTLY AMENDED CLAIM FORM DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RE-SEALED PRIOR TO SERVICE

April 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The cases on service of the claim form continue to flow.  Here the defendant appealed a decision that it was not necessary for a claimant to serve a sealed copy of an amended claim form.   As we shall see the…

AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"

AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”

April 17, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where an important time limit was, on the face of it missed, because the court itself “thwarted” genuine attempts to lodge an appeal in time.  It is an object lesson the care that needs to…

MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

April 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The  Revised Law Society Guidance on Mazur was looked at in a previous post. Whilst we wait for the SRA Guidance it may be useful to look at the key differences in the Law Society Guidance before and after the…

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS:  NOW AVAILABLE "ON DEMAND"

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”

April 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar

If you could not attend the webinar on the practical implications of  the Court of Appeal decision in Mazur yesterday it is now available “on demand”.  The Mazur decision confirms that authorised individuals may delegate tasks within the conduct of…

SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

April 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

For many years now we have been looking at the interaction between an application to set aside a default judgment and the “Denton” criteria.   Here we look at another case where the court considered relief from sanctions in this context. …

THE JUDGE FOUND AGAINST ME BECAUSE THEY GAVE TOO MUCH LEEWAY TO A LITIGANT IN PERSON : ALLEGATIONS OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE PARTICULARISED (AND CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT)

THE JUDGE FOUND AGAINST ME BECAUSE THEY GAVE TOO MUCH LEEWAY TO A LITIGANT IN PERSON : ALLEGATIONS OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE PARTICULARISED (AND CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT)

April 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we consider some unusual grounds of appeal.  An unsuccessful claimant appealed on the grounds, inter alia, that the judge had erred in giving leeway to the defendant who was a litigant in person. What is important here is that…

MAZUR MATTERS 57: THE INDEMNITY INSURER'S VIEW: "DOES IT CHANGE THAT MUCH REALLY?": "I STRUGGLE TO THINK OF REAL LIFE SCENARIOS THAT WOULD HAVE FALLEN FOUL OF SHELDON J'S DISTINCTION BUT ARE NOW LAWFUL (AND VICE VERSA)"

MAZUR MATTERS 57: THE INDEMNITY INSURER’S VIEW: “DOES IT CHANGE THAT MUCH REALLY?”: “I STRUGGLE TO THINK OF REAL LIFE SCENARIOS THAT WOULD HAVE FALLEN FOUL OF SHELDON J’S DISTINCTION BUT ARE NOW LAWFUL (AND VICE VERSA)”

April 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

I have written several times that when it came to providing practical guidance on how to deal with the Mazur judgment it was often insurers that were far more helpful than the regulators.  It is worthwhile having a look at…

ANOTHER CASE ON FAILING TO PAY THE COURT FEE: AN APPEAL WAS STILL LODGED IN TIME EVEN THOUGH NO FEE WAS PAID AT ALL

ANOTHER CASE ON FAILING TO PAY THE COURT FEE: AN APPEAL WAS STILL LODGED IN TIME EVEN THOUGH NO FEE WAS PAID AT ALL

April 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

Here we have a case that extends the principles in Siniakovich v Hassan-Soudey. The Court of Appeal held that a statutory appeal was lodged within time, even though it was sent by email to the court and no fee was…

SERVICE POINTS 32: MISSING OUT THE NAME OF THE ROAD ON THE CLAIM FORM  DID NOT INVALIDATE SERVICE

SERVICE POINTS 32: MISSING OUT THE NAME OF THE ROAD ON THE CLAIM FORM DID NOT INVALIDATE SERVICE

April 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

The judge here considered an argument that a failure to include the name of the defendant’s street on the claim form meant that service was defective.  This argument was rejected.  The fact that the street was mentioned on the land…

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS: (THIS IS NOT "AS YOU WERE"):  WEBINAR 9th APRIL 2026

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS: (THIS IS NOT “AS YOU WERE”): WEBINAR 9th APRIL 2026

April 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Webinar

I have already written about the misunderstandings that have occurred in relation to the Mazur judgment.  The judgment is far more nuanced than some commentators suggest and a detailed knowledge of what is required is essential for anyone involved in…

MAZUR MATTERS 54: THINGS WE STILL DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (1)  WHAT IS MEANT BY "THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION"? THE COURT DID NOT SUPPLY AN "EXHAUSTIVE DEFINITION"

MAZUR MATTERS 54: THINGS WE STILL DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (1) WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”? THE COURT DID NOT SUPPLY AN “EXHAUSTIVE DEFINITION”

April 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment given yesterday still leaves us with many uncertainties and litigators still need to tread with some care.  Here we look at one of the matters that the Court of Appeal was not able to give a definitive answer…

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 5: THE "NUANCED" BITS: IT IS ALL ABOUT DELEGATION OF TASKS AND SUPERVISION (AND HERE IT IS OVER TO THE REGULATORS...)

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 5: THE “NUANCED” BITS: IT IS ALL ABOUT DELEGATION OF TASKS AND SUPERVISION (AND HERE IT IS OVER TO THE REGULATORS…)

March 31, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

I have already written that the judgement is Mazur is far more nuanced than many commentators have suggested.  It does not give a “free for all” for non-authorised persons to litigate. Rather it gives authorised lawyers the ability to delegate…

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 3: NO DEFINITIVE DEFINITION OF THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: BUT WE DO HAVE THE "MAGNIFICENT SEVEN"

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 3: NO DEFINITIVE DEFINITION OF THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: BUT WE DO HAVE THE “MAGNIFICENT SEVEN”

March 31, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content

We continue our look at the judgment today by looking at the court’s more detailed consideration of what was meant by the “conduct of litigation”.  The court did not give a definition. However it did give seven key points as to…

MAZUR COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE OVERTURNED: THE SUPERVISION OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS

MAZUR COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE OVERTURNED: THE SUPERVISION OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS

March 31, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I will be writing about this judgment throughout the day.  The first posts will contain a summary of the views from the court.  Later posts will analyse the position as a whole. This  post contains a consideration of the carrying…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS REFUSAL TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT OF COMMITTAL APPLICATION: THE COURT HAD AN OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THAT A PARTY COULD AVAIL THEMSELVES OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS REFUSAL TO GRANT ADJOURNMENT OF COMMITTAL APPLICATION: THE COURT HAD AN OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THAT A PARTY COULD AVAIL THEMSELVES OF LEGAL REPRESENTATION

March 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

In this case the Court of Appeal overturned a decision not to grant an adjournment of committal proceedings.  The Court held that the judge below did not appear to be aware of the fact that a respondent to committal proceedings…

THE COURT REFUSES AN APPLICATION THAT A TRANSCRIPT BE OBTAINED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE: IF YOU ARE BROKE THEN WHY HAVEN'T YOU ATTENDED COURT TO PROVE THIS?

THE COURT REFUSES AN APPLICATION THAT A TRANSCRIPT BE OBTAINED AT PUBLIC EXPENSE: IF YOU ARE BROKE THEN WHY HAVEN’T YOU ATTENDED COURT TO PROVE THIS?

March 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here is a judgment that contains a central irony.  The applicant had failed to attend court to be examined about his means and as a result his passport was confiscated. His application to have the passport returned was refused. In…

THE APPELLATE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE APPELLANTS TO RUN A NEW ISSUE : THE ABILITY TO PAY COSTS IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR AND WAS NOT CONSIDERED PROPERLY

THE APPELLATE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE APPELLANTS TO RUN A NEW ISSUE : THE ABILITY TO PAY COSTS IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR AND WAS NOT CONSIDERED PROPERLY

March 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we have a case where the appellants were, initially, allowed to argue a point that had not been argued in the court below.  The Court of Appeal was clear in its view that the judge should not have allowed…

PROVING THINGS 282: THE INJURED CLAIMANT ADDUCED NO EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO...)

PROVING THINGS 282: THE INJURED CLAIMANT ADDUCED NO EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO…)

March 17, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

Here we look at a Privy Council decision in a personal injury case. The claimant lost at first instance, the defendant having elected to call no evidence.  What is interesting about this case is the constant motif in the judgment…

EXPERT WATCH 41: THE COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO OVERTURN A DECISION WHERE THE "WRONG" TYPE OF  JOINT EXPERT WAS INSTRUCTED

EXPERT WATCH 41: THE COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO OVERTURN A DECISION WHERE THE “WRONG” TYPE OF JOINT EXPERT WAS INSTRUCTED

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

This is an unusual case where, after the event, a party to the litigation argued that the court had relied on the “wrong” type of expert evidence. An educational psychologist had been instructed as a joint expert whereas what was…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE "BEAR TRAP" IN WAITING

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE “BEAR TRAP” IN WAITING

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The back to basics point today is based on a recent case which shows the importance of serving the particulars of claim within the four month period allowed for service of the claim form. The claimant served the particulars three…

COST BITES 362: WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON A DISBURSEMENT: READ THE JUDGMENT

COST BITES 362: WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON A DISBURSEMENT: READ THE JUDGMENT

March 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

An earlier post related to this case which deals with the question of whether a party should provide a breakdown of an invoice from a translator. Ben Williams KC has kindly provided me with a copy of the judgment. “In my judgment,…

THE QUESTION OF THE CLAIMANT'S CAPACITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT A LITIGATION FRIEND - THIS DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE DEFENDANT'S POSITION

THE QUESTION OF THE CLAIMANT’S CAPACITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT A LITIGATION FRIEND – THIS DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE DEFENDANT’S POSITION

March 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we have a case where a defendant appealed against a decision it agreed with. The judge found that the claimant had capacity and did not require a Litigation Friend. However the defendant’s issue was with the very decision to…

COST BITES 361: THE STEPS A CLAIMANT SHOULD TAKE IF THEY WISH TO RECOVER PRE-ALLOCATION COSTS ON THE BASIS THAT THE CASE WOULD HAVE PROCEEDED IN THE FAST TRACK

COST BITES 361: THE STEPS A CLAIMANT SHOULD TAKE IF THEY WISH TO RECOVER PRE-ALLOCATION COSTS ON THE BASIS THAT THE CASE WOULD HAVE PROCEEDED IN THE FAST TRACK

March 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Andrew Hogan for sending me a copy of this decision which relates to pre-allocation costs in housing cases. It deals with the question of how the court should address pre-allocation costs where a housing disrepair claim…

EXPERT WATCH 39: WHEN THE HOME SECRETARY DID NOT CHALLENGE EXPERT EVIDENCE SHE CANNOT BE THAT SURPRISED WHEN THE COURT ACCEPTS IT

EXPERT WATCH 39: WHEN THE HOME SECRETARY DID NOT CHALLENGE EXPERT EVIDENCE SHE CANNOT BE THAT SURPRISED WHEN THE COURT ACCEPTS IT

March 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are looking at another case where a party failed to challenge expert evidence. The Court of Appeal was clear in its view that if fault lay anywhere it was with the appellant’s failure to challenge the expert evidence that…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: WITNESS CREDIBILITY:  THE PRINCIPLES IN TUI -V- GRIFFITHS DID NOT IMPACT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF A LAY WITNESS

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE PRINCIPLES IN TUI -V- GRIFFITHS DID NOT IMPACT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF A LAY WITNESS

March 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we have an unusual argument where an appellant attempted to use the decision in Tui -v- Griffiths to argue that a tribunal should not have accepted the evidence of a lay witness.  The evidence of the witness in question…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ABOUT LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER LEADING TO CLAIMANT BEING ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSD

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ABOUT LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER LEADING TO CLAIMANT BEING ENTITLED TO COSTS TO BE ASSESSD

March 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

It is a busy day for Court of Appeal decisions on procedure. Here we have an important judgment on Part 36.  What are the costs consequences if a defendant makes a Part 36 offer when the case is subject to…

IMPORTANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: A CLAIM IS BROUGHT WHEN A CLAIM FORM IS SENT TO THE COURT EVEN IF IT DOES NOT HAVE THE CORRECT ISSUE FEE

IMPORTANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: A CLAIM IS BROUGHT WHEN A CLAIM FORM IS SENT TO THE COURT EVEN IF IT DOES NOT HAVE THE CORRECT ISSUE FEE

March 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content

This Court of Appeal decision today clarifies the position when a claimant files a claim at court but mistakenly does not pay the correct fee.  The Court held that the claim was “delivered” when the claim was filed at court….

CCC AND LOST YEARS IN THE SUPREME COURT: THE POTENTIAL STING IN THE TAIL FOR CLAIMANTS: "WAGES IN HEAVEN SHOULD NOT BE AWARDED WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED ON EARTH"

CCC AND LOST YEARS IN THE SUPREME COURT: THE POTENTIAL STING IN THE TAIL FOR CLAIMANTS: “WAGES IN HEAVEN SHOULD NOT BE AWARDED WHEN THEY ARE NEEDED ON EARTH”

March 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

Here we are looking at some of the observations made by Lord Burrows in the recent judgment given by the Supreme Court.  In the short term it is good news for seriously injured child claimants. However Lord Burrows has laid…

THE SECRETARY OF STATE REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "AN APPALLING MANIFESTATION OF A LAX CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE"

THE SECRETARY OF STATE REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “AN APPALLING MANIFESTATION OF A LAX CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE”

March 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

For (at least) the third time in recent weeks we are considering defaults or mistakes made on behalf of a Secretary of State. The delays and mistakes here were manifold. The Secretary of State was fortunate in obtaining an extension…

MAZUR MATTERS 52: AND NOW WE WAIT... STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION AND "DANCING ON A PINHEAD" : SOME USEFUL LINKS

MAZUR MATTERS 52: AND NOW WE WAIT… STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION AND “DANCING ON A PINHEAD” : SOME USEFUL LINKS

February 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct

The arguments in the Mazur appeal have been completed. The profession now awaits.    I was able to watch the first 1 1/2 days.  I have to say that phrase “dancing on a pinhead” came to mind when I was…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 FIXED COSTS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE HEARD - DECISION PENDING (PLUS A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON PART 36 ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2026)

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON PART 36 FIXED COSTS AND LATE ACCEPTANCE HEARD – DECISION PENDING (PLUS A FINAL PLUG FOR THE WEBINAR ON PART 36 ON THE 26th FEBRUARY 2026)

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Part 36

The Court of Appeal has heard an appeal against the decision in Laura Attersley v UK Insurance Limited [2025] EWHC 884 (KB).   This is an interesting decision on Part 36.  I understand that judgment is pending.  This was one of many…

COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR'S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY...)

COST BITES 359: A SOLICITOR’S FAILURE TO SIGN THE COSTS CERTIFICATE PROPERLY DID NOT RENDER THE BILL INVALID (THIS MAY EXPLAIN WHY BIRMINGHAM COUNCIL DOES NOT HAVE ANY MONEY…)

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Default judgment,, Members Content

Here we have an appeal by a paying party on a highly technical point. The appeal failed.  It highlights the dangers of (i) permitting a default certificate to be entered; (ii) taking technical points which (as the Court observed) led…

MAZUR MATTERS 51: WHY THE HEARING IS NOT BEING "LIVESTREAMED": A QUICK WORD FOR THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS

MAZUR MATTERS 51: WHY THE HEARING IS NOT BEING “LIVESTREAMED”: A QUICK WORD FOR THE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure

The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP continues today. There were (I am told) some 400 people watching remotely.   This has not stopped a large number of people  online putting forward (sometimes bizarre) theories as to…

MAZUR MATTERS 50: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM: GETTING READY FOR THE APPEAL THIS AFTERNOON: BUT IF YOU WANT TO WATCH - YOU HAVE TO ASK...

MAZUR MATTERS 50: THE CALM BEFORE THE STORM: GETTING READY FOR THE APPEAL THIS AFTERNOON: BUT IF YOU WANT TO WATCH – YOU HAVE TO ASK…

February 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The appeal in the decision of Mazur -v- Charles Russell Speechlys LLP begins at 2.00 today, it continues on Wednesday and Thursday.  It is not being live streamed (To be fair I have  been sent a link – the Court…

COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED...)

COST BITES 357: DISBURSEMENTS: WHAT IS A REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONAL INTERPRETER’S FEE? NOTE OF THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (AND THAT PERENNIAL ISSUE OF WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED…)

February 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Ben Williams KC for sending me a note of the judgment yesterday which was the appeal against the decision in Santiago v Motor Insurers’ Bureau (The County Court at Central London, 22nd February 2025). The second time…

COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE "AT LARGE"

COST BITES 356: DO FIXED COSTS APPLY WHEN THE CASE IS TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM A FIXED COSTS REGIME TO ONE WHERE COSTS ARE “AT LARGE”

February 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

Here we are considering a Court of Appeal decision about what costs order should be made when an action is transferred from a  fixed costs regime  to one where costs are at large. On the face of it the decision…

SERVICE POINTS 28 : EFFECTIVE SERVICE ON A RESIDENCE IN ENGLAND COULD NOT TAKE PLACE WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS IN FACT ABROAD - AND LEGALLY PREVENTED FROM RETURNING

SERVICE POINTS 28 : EFFECTIVE SERVICE ON A RESIDENCE IN ENGLAND COULD NOT TAKE PLACE WHEN THE DEFENDANT WAS IN FACT ABROAD – AND LEGALLY PREVENTED FROM RETURNING

February 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

We are looking at a Court of Appeal judgment today which overturned a finding that a defendant had been properly served at an address in England.  The defendant was not living in England when proceedings were served and, indeed, there…

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT: THE APPELLANTS HAD NEVER BREACHED A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HOW "UNLESS ORDERS" SHOULD BE CONSTRUED

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT: THE APPELLANTS HAD NEVER BREACHED A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HOW “UNLESS ORDERS” SHOULD BE CONSTRUED

February 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

For the second time this month we are looking at a successful appeal against the construction of an “unless” order.  In both cases the judges below had found that the appellants had breached the order. In both cases that finding…

LOST YEARS DAMAGES AND THE CHILD CLAIMANT: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY

LOST YEARS DAMAGES AND THE CHILD CLAIMANT: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY

February 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment of the Supreme Court today considered whether “lost years” damages should be awarded to a young child.  The Court, by a majority, allowed the claimant’s appeal and held that damages should be awarded in these circumstances.  This post…

COST BITES 349 : THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED 100% OF THEIR COSTS: THE SECRETARY OF STATE'S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL WAS A HIGHLY RELEVANT FACTOR

COST BITES 349 : THE CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED 100% OF THEIR COSTS: THE SECRETARY OF STATE’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL WAS A HIGHLY RELEVANT FACTOR

February 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

It is rare for the Court of Appeal to overturn a first instance decision as to costs. We see an example of this happening here.  The Upper Tribunal awarded the claimant 75% of his costs of a judicial review application…

COST BITES 344: INSOLVENCY COURT HAS POWER TO MAKE A PRO BONO COSTS ORDER FOR THE COSTS OF COUNSEL: POINTS TO WARN ABOUT IF YOUR OPPONENTS ARE ACTING ON A PRO BONO BASIS

COST BITES 344: INSOLVENCY COURT HAS POWER TO MAKE A PRO BONO COSTS ORDER FOR THE COSTS OF COUNSEL: POINTS TO WARN ABOUT IF YOUR OPPONENTS ARE ACTING ON A PRO BONO BASIS

February 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We have looked at pro bono costs orders several times.   This case has an unusual twist in that the case was an insolvency case. The judge considered the Insolvency Rules and found that the court had power to make an…

THE PROFOUND DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDING PROCEEDINGS TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAS EXPIRED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: WHY CLAIMANTS HAVE TO BE CERTAIN OF WHO THEY ARE SUING...

THE PROFOUND DIFFICULTIES IN AMENDING PROCEEDINGS TO SUBSTITUTE A PARTY AFTER THE LIMITATION PERIOD HAS EXPIRED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: WHY CLAIMANTS HAVE TO BE CERTAIN OF WHO THEY ARE SUING…

February 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Professional negligence,

This decision today emphasises the difficulties for a claimant who has waited until near the end of the limitation period, issued and then finds that they have not sued the correct defendant.  It is now less likely that a court…

WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS A SOLICITOR'S FIRM AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CLAIM "HINDERED BY A SERIES OF PROCEDURAL BREACHES": NOT A GREAT START TO THE CASE

WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS A SOLICITOR’S FIRM AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CLAIM “HINDERED BY A SERIES OF PROCEDURAL BREACHES”: NOT A GREAT START TO THE CASE

February 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

It is a poor start to a solicitor’s application for judicial review of the Legal Ombudsman when the firm itself has failed to comply with rules and directions.  We have such a case here.  The claimant firm applied for judicial…

THE CLAIMANTS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: COURT REFUSES AN EXTENSION: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: OUT OF TIME MEANS OUT OF COURT...

THE CLAIMANTS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: COURT REFUSES AN EXTENSION: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: OUT OF TIME MEANS OUT OF COURT…

February 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

One thing anyone considering an appeal should know, with absolute certainty, is the date the appeal has to be lodged. This, in turn, involves knowing the date on which the period starts running.  Here we see a case where the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS

February 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in some detail.  The judgment provides a useful reminder of some basic principles. Firstly that a litigant seeking relief from sanctions cannot complain about the original…

HIGH COURT TACKLES SOME DIFFICULT PROCEDURAL ISSUES (1): IS A PREVIOUS BREACH NECESSARY FOR A PEREMPTORY ORDER TO BE MADE

HIGH COURT TACKLES SOME DIFFICULT PROCEDURAL ISSUES (1): IS A PREVIOUS BREACH NECESSARY FOR A PEREMPTORY ORDER TO BE MADE

February 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders

We are looking at judgment that is, essentially, all about procedural compliance and the court’s approach to making “unless orders”.  The approach of the appellate court to case management decisions could be added to that list.  It is a detailed…

PART 36 OFFERS ON COSTS: JUDGE ALLOWS DEFENDANT'S APPEAL: THE OFFER HAD NOT BEEN BEATEN, THE COSTS OF PREPARING THE BILL WERE NOT RECOVERABLE

PART 36 OFFERS ON COSTS: JUDGE ALLOWS DEFENDANT’S APPEAL: THE OFFER HAD NOT BEEN BEATEN, THE COSTS OF PREPARING THE BILL WERE NOT RECOVERABLE

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of this decision which highlights an important issue in relation to Part 36 and the assessment of costs. At first instance a Deputy District Judge found that the…

MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR'S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS "NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION"

MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR’S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS “NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION”

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The snappily titled “Interim Report: Regulatory review of advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies”  from the Legal Services Board is five pages long (including one page spent on…

PROVING THINGS 276: APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE'S "INFERENCES" OF LOSS: DAMAGES AWARD OF £347,285 REPLACED WITH £NIL

PROVING THINGS 276: APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE’S “INFERENCES” OF LOSS: DAMAGES AWARD OF £347,285 REPLACED WITH £NIL

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

This is a classic “Proving Things” case, the only surprise being that it reached the appeal stage.   On appeal the the judge overturned the trial judge’s findings in favour of the defendant’s counterclaim and reduced a damages award of £347,285…

SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIFIC ISSUES: WHEN SHOULD A  "COMPELLING REASON" PREVENT JUDGMENT BEING GIVEN? (NOT HERE...)

SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIFIC ISSUES: WHEN SHOULD A “COMPELLING REASON” PREVENT JUDGMENT BEING GIVEN? (NOT HERE…)

January 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case, Summary judgment

One ground for resisting an application for summary judgment is that there is a “compelling reason why the case or issue should be disposed of at trial”.  It is unusual for the issue of a “compelling reason” to be considered,…

1 2 … 19 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

  • 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…)
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A “NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE” (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS – BUT… : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON…

Top Posts

  • COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF "COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS": THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • 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
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 2: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PD57AC: "HE KNOWS NOT OF WHAT HE SPEAKS"

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.