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 » Page 11
WHEN DOES THE LIMITATION PERIOD START TO RUN WHEN A BARRISTER GIVES TWO ADVICES?

WHEN DOES THE LIMITATION PERIOD START TO RUN WHEN A BARRISTER GIVES TWO ADVICES?

May 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In Sciortino v Beaumont [2021] EWCA Civ 786 the Court of Appeal allowed a claimant’s appeal against a finding that a negligence action against a barrister was statute barred. Although this is a case about limitation and negligence it has…

IN THE MIDNIGHT HOUR - THE SUPREMES' VERSION:  WHEN DOES THE LIMITATION PERIOD START TO RUN? ("WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES")

IN THE MIDNIGHT HOUR – THE SUPREMES’ VERSION: WHEN DOES THE LIMITATION PERIOD START TO RUN? (“WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES”)

May 21, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

Regular readers of this blog would reasonably suppose that lawyers like to live dangerously – leaving tasks to the last minute (and sometimes beyond).  An example of this can be seen in the judgment today in Matthew & Ors v…

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE: THEY "SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO MAKE THE DISCLOSURE APPLICATION IN THE FIRST PLACE"

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE: THEY “SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO MAKE THE DISCLOSURE APPLICATION IN THE FIRST PLACE”

May 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Disclosure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In Sparkes v London Pension Funds Authority & Anor [2021] EWHC 1265 (QB) Mr Justice Murray allowed an appeal and made an order for non-party disclosure in favour of a claimant.  There are few appellate decisions in relation to non-party…

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE COVID PROTOCOL MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THE TIME LIMITS: A POINT TO REMEMBER

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE COVID PROTOCOL MAKES NO DIFFERENCE TO THE TIME LIMITS: A POINT TO REMEMBER

May 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Coronavirus, Extensions of time, Members Content

In  Claydon Yield-O-Meter Ltd v Mzuri Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 1322 (IPEC)  HHJ Hacon rejected an argument that the Covid Protocol had any effect on the provisions for applying for permission to appeal.  The proposed appellants should have applied…

DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE NOT SET ASIDE: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS WRONG, BUT RECTIFIABLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE NOT SET ASIDE: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS WRONG, BUT RECTIFIABLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

May 13, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment

Cases on Default Costs Certificates appear to be like London Buses – they come along in twos. Here we have the second case in two days.  In  Serbian Orthodox Church – Serbian Patriarchy v Kesar & Co [2021] EWHC 1205…

A PART 36 OFFER MADE LESS THAN 21 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL: WHAT HAPPENS IF THE TRIAL IS ADJOURNED

A PART 36 OFFER MADE LESS THAN 21 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL: WHAT HAPPENS IF THE TRIAL IS ADJOURNED

May 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

In  Reader v SPIE Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 1221 (QB) Mr Justice Andrew Baker considered an issue in relation to the construction of  CPR 36.  A party made an offer less than 21 days before the date set for…

OBJECTING TO EVIDENCE BEING ADMITTED CAUSES PROBLEMS ON APPEAL : CLAIMANT GETS BITTEN BY ITS OWN HORSE

OBJECTING TO EVIDENCE BEING ADMITTED CAUSES PROBLEMS ON APPEAL : CLAIMANT GETS BITTEN BY ITS OWN HORSE

May 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

In Lifestyle Equities C.V. & Anor v Ahmed & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 675 the Court of Appeal allowed, in part, an assessment against the assessment of damages.  What is interesting here is the point that the claimants objection to…

COSTS OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET WHEN A PARTY IS LIMITED TO COURT FEES: STRIKING OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, ADMINSTRATIVE ERRORS BY THE COURT, ABORTIVE COURT HEARINGS: ALL PROCEDURAL LIFE IS HERE...

COSTS OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET WHEN A PARTY IS LIMITED TO COURT FEES: STRIKING OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, ADMINSTRATIVE ERRORS BY THE COURT, ABORTIVE COURT HEARINGS: ALL PROCEDURAL LIFE IS HERE…

April 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

The decision of Mr Justice Marcus Smith in Pasricha v Pasricha [2021] EWHC 1017 (Ch) contains a consideration of the circumstances in which a court can order costs to be paid to a party when their budget has been limited…

LIMITATION AND THE CLAIMANT'S STATUS: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO SYMPATHETIC TO DEFENDANTS WHO HAVE COMMITTED FRAUD

LIMITATION AND THE CLAIMANT’S STATUS: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO SYMPATHETIC TO DEFENDANTS WHO HAVE COMMITTED FRAUD

April 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In OT Computers Ltd v Infineon Technologies Ag & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 501 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that an action brought by a company that was in liquidation was not statute barred.   “It is, moreover,…

IF YOU’VE MADE THE DEFENDANT BANKRUPT – YOU CAN’T COMPLAIN WHEN YOU’VE GOT WHAT YOU ASKED FOR

April 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Enforcement, Members Content

The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd v Sinclair & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 505 contains an important lesson to litigators considering enforcing a judgment.  The claimant had made the defendant bankrupt whilst…

COURT GRANTS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "IT IS UNFAIR... TO BE CRITICAL OF A PARTY FOR FAILING TO MEET A DEADLINE THAT WAS ALREADY UNLIKELY TO BE ANYWAY, WHATEVER STEPS HAD BEEN TAKEN TO COMPLY WITH IT"

COURT GRANTS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “IT IS UNFAIR… TO BE CRITICAL OF A PARTY FOR FAILING TO MEET A DEADLINE THAT WAS ALREADY UNLIKELY TO BE ANYWAY, WHATEVER STEPS HAD BEEN TAKEN TO COMPLY WITH IT”

April 13, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

For the second time today I am reporting on a successful application for relief from sanctions.  In  Melars Group Ltd v East-West Logistics LLP [2021] EWHC 874 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson granted an appellant relief from sanctions following a…

THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE AND CPR CANNOT BE USED TO OVERRIDE THE REQUIREMENT THAT CASES BE DEALT WITH "JUSTLY": HIGH COURT DECISION

THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE AND CPR CANNOT BE USED TO OVERRIDE THE REQUIREMENT THAT CASES BE DEALT WITH “JUSTLY”: HIGH COURT DECISION

March 30, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Lane in Ibrahim v London Borough of Haringey & Anor [2021] EWHC 731 shows an unsuccessful attempt to argue that the “overriding objective” justified a preliminary finding made after the court did not hear evidence….

CONSTRUING REGULATIONS AFTER BREXIT: COURT OF APPEAL GUIDANCE: THE CASE OF THE ABSENT PILOT

CONSTRUING REGULATIONS AFTER BREXIT: COURT OF APPEAL GUIDANCE: THE CASE OF THE ABSENT PILOT

March 30, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Brexit, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Michael Rawlinson QC for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment in Lipton -v- BA City Flyer Limited [2021] EWCA Civ 454. The judgment of Lord Justice Green contains a comprehensive…

CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER TO ACCEPT 90% OF DAMAGES NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION IS IN ISSUE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER TO ACCEPT 90% OF DAMAGES NOT EFFECTIVE WHEN CAUSATION IS IN ISSUE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

March 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content, Part 36

In the judgment today in Seabrook v Adam [2021] EWCA Civ 382 the Court of Appeal considered when a Part 36 offer to accept a reduced percentage on liability was effective when only causation was in dispute.  It was held…

THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIOD: ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, PUBLIC POLICY - AND A BASIC ERROR ABOUT THE DATE: CLAIMANT HAS TO FALL BACK ON "UNDUE HARDSHIP" ARGUMENT

THE FOREIGN LIMITATION PERIOD: ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE, PUBLIC POLICY – AND A BASIC ERROR ABOUT THE DATE: CLAIMANT HAS TO FALL BACK ON “UNDUE HARDSHIP” ARGUMENT

March 12, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision in Begum v Maran (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 326 contains some interesting observations on the law of tort and duty of care.  However the claimant in this case faces another fundamental challenge.  There is…

SANCTIONS FOR LATE FAILURE TO FILE A COSTS BUDGET DO NOT APPLY TO INCURRED COSTS: REPORT OF A COUNTY COURT DECISION

March 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Sanctions

Recommended reading today is a useful report from PIC available here in relation to a decision in Hardy -v- Skeelis (4th March 2021, County Court at Stoke, HHJ Rawlings).  The appeal decision confirms that the sanctions imposed for failing to…

COURT CAN COMPEL SOLICITOR TO ATTEND COURT TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES (THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL)

COURT CAN COMPEL SOLICITOR TO ATTEND COURT TO EXPLAIN THEMSELVES (THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL)

March 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Wasted Costs, Witness statements

NB THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL, SEE THE DECISION AT Hunt v Annolight Ltd & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1663 The decision of Mr Justice Saini in  Hunt Annolight Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 3744 (QB) has just arrived on…

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDERS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN STONE: COURT SHOULD NOT BE "STUCK IN THE RAILS": MASTER COULD VARY ORDER OF PREVIOUS MASTER

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDERS ARE NOT WRITTEN IN STONE: COURT SHOULD NOT BE “STUCK IN THE RAILS”: MASTER COULD VARY ORDER OF PREVIOUS MASTER

March 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Members Content

In  Oyston & Anor v Rubin & Anor [2021] EWHC 448 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles considered arguments in relation to whether a Master was entitled to vary a previous order made by a different Master.   The judge emphasised that case…

APPEAL ALLOWED WHERE THE TRIAL JUDGE DEPARTED FROM THE PLEADED CASE: "A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE JUDGE'S FUNCTION)

APPEAL ALLOWED WHERE THE TRIAL JUDGE DEPARTED FROM THE PLEADED CASE: “A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE JUDGE’S FUNCTION)

March 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Satyam Enterprises Ltd v Burton & Anor [2021] EWCA Civ 287 provides another example of the importance of statements of case. The Court allowed an appeal where the trial judge had…

AN APPLICATION THAT WAS "OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT": NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “OPPORTUNISTIC AND WITHOUT MERIT”: NON-PAYMENT OF THE COURT FEE WITHIN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT GIVE RISE TO A LIMITATION DEFENCE: JARNDYCE -v- JARNDYCE CONSIDERED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Limitation, Members Content, Striking out

The issue of non-payment, or under-payment, of court fees was considered by the Court of Appeal in the judgment today in  Butters & Anor v Hayes [2021] EWCA Civ 252. THE CASE During the course of an action the court…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 90: APPEALS, RESPONDENT'S NOTICES AND DENTON

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 90: APPEALS, RESPONDENT’S NOTICES AND DENTON

February 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Court of Appeal judgment in Unite the Union v Alec McfAdden [2021] EWCA Civ 199 highlights the needs for a party, responding to an appeal, to file a Respondent’s Notice if it wants to argue there are additional, or…

ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL-HEALTH: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT HEARING SHOULD GO AHEAD: A TRIAL SHOULD BE "FAIR IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES"

ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL-HEALTH: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT HEARING SHOULD GO AHEAD: A TRIAL SHOULD BE “FAIR IN ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES”

February 22, 2021 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Members Content

“Applying for an adjournment on the grounds of ill health” is a common (indeed one of the most common) search terms that leads people to this blog.  It is unusual to see a Court of Appeal decision on this issue….

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…

WHEN A SOLICITOR SAYS "BURN IT" IN RELATION TO DOCUMENTS THIS GIVES RISE TO A PRIMA FACIE ISSUE OF  CONTEMPT OF COURT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

WHEN A SOLICITOR SAYS “BURN IT” IN RELATION TO DOCUMENTS THIS GIVES RISE TO A PRIMA FACIE ISSUE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

February 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Disclosure, Members Content

In the judgment today in  Ocado Group PLC & Anr v McKeeve [2021] EWCA Civ 145 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that  the court should not allow an application for contempt of court against a solicitor to proceed….

IF A DEFENDANT IS BEING SUED FOR TOO MUCH MONEY THEN IT SHOULD USE PART 36: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURN DECISION THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO ORDER FOR COSTS

IF A DEFENDANT IS BEING SUED FOR TOO MUCH MONEY THEN IT SHOULD USE PART 36: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURN DECISION THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO ORDER FOR COSTS

February 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Global Energy Horizons Corporation v Gray [2021] EWCA Civ 123 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that there be no order for costs. The fact that the claimant had succeeded on a fraction of its claim was not…

TAKING APPROPRIATE STEPS WHEN A DEFENDANT DOES NOT HAVE CAPACITY: AN IMPORTANT WARNING

TAKING APPROPRIATE STEPS WHEN A DEFENDANT DOES NOT HAVE CAPACITY: AN IMPORTANT WARNING

February 5, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

A real and profound warning about the dangers of issuing against someone without capacity is given in the judgment of  HHJ Hodge QC sitting as a judge of the High Court in Kumar v Hellard [2021] EWHC 181 (Ch).  …

BLOATED DRAFT GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND RELENTLESS DOCUMENTARY ATTRITION: NOT A GOOD START WHEN SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL

BLOATED DRAFT GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND RELENTLESS DOCUMENTARY ATTRITION: NOT A GOOD START WHEN SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL

February 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group PLC & Anor [2021] EWHC 146 (TCC) sets out the judge’s concerns in relation to the over-lengthy documents filed in support of an application for…

SUING A CLAIMANT WHO HAS ACCEPTED A PART 36 OFFER: THE PROFOUND PROBLEMS WHEN PLEADING FRAUD: YOU CAN'T "WAIT AND SEE"

SUING A CLAIMANT WHO HAS ACCEPTED A PART 36 OFFER: THE PROFOUND PROBLEMS WHEN PLEADING FRAUD: YOU CAN’T “WAIT AND SEE”

January 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case

There is an interesting history in the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in in Kasem v University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWHC 136 (QB).  It is a case that is an object lesson in the stringent requirements…

AN INTERESTING CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: NO INTEREST AWARDED ON DAMAGES FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT

AN INTERESTING CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: NO INTEREST AWARDED ON DAMAGES FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION AND FALSE IMPRISONMENT

January 21, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Interest, Members Content

In Rees v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2021] EWCA Civ 49 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision not to award interest on damages for damages for malicious prosecution and misfeasance in public office. THE CASE The claimant…

PROVING THINGS 201: THE WHITE LION HOTEL CASE AND PROVING BREACH OF DUTY BY AN OCCUPIER

PROVING THINGS 201: THE WHITE LION HOTEL CASE AND PROVING BREACH OF DUTY BY AN OCCUPIER

January 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Fatal Accidents, Liability, Members Content

In the judgment in The White Lion Hotel (A Partnership) v James [2021] EWCA Civ 31 the Court of Appeal set out some importance principles in relation to claims based on the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957.  The court upheld a…

LAWFULNESS OF DAMAGES BASED AGREEMENTS UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

January 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In a judgment given today the Court of Appeal upheld the decision at first instance in the judgment of HHJ Parfitt (sitting as a High Court Judge in Lexlaw Ltd v Zuberi [2020] EWHC 1855 (Ch). THE COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT In…

PROVING THINGS 194: PROVING CAUSATION IS AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF A CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE

December 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case

The judgment of Mrs Justice Foster in Norfolk County Council v Durrant [2020] EWHC 3590 (QB) illustrates how it is essential for a claimant to prove causation in a case based on negligence.  It also highlights the need to consider,…

MISTAKES IN THE TERMS OF AN ORDER, DENTON AND THE SLIP RULE: AN UNFORTUNATE ERROR LEADS TO A LOT OF LITIGATION

MISTAKES IN THE TERMS OF AN ORDER, DENTON AND THE SLIP RULE: AN UNFORTUNATE ERROR LEADS TO A LOT OF LITIGATION

December 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In IC v RC [2020] EWHC 2997 (Fam) Mrs Justice Knowles had to consider the Denton criteria and the slip rule.  It also serves as an important warning to anyone undertaking the task of drafting a court order.   “I…

THE IMPORTANCE OF EMBARGOED JUDGMENTS: A REMINDER OF THE COURT OF APPEAL'S JUDGMENT IN O'CONNELL

THE IMPORTANCE OF EMBARGOED JUDGMENTS: A REMINDER OF THE COURT OF APPEAL’S JUDGMENT IN O’CONNELL

December 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Draft judgments are often sent to parties in advance, but sent out on an “embargoed” basis – not to be disclosed until after the date they are formally handed down.  Recent comments on Twitter leads me to think that this…

UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST JUDGE'S DISCRETION TO EXERCISE S.33 DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF A CLAIMANT: DECISION TODAY

UNSUCCESSFUL APPEAL AGAINST JUDGE’S DISCRETION TO EXERCISE S.33 DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF A CLAIMANT: DECISION TODAY

December 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In Azam v University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 3384 (QB) Mr Justice Saini dismissed a defendant’s appeal when a trial judge had allowed the claimant’s application under Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980.  This judgment highlights…

CHALLENGING FINDINGS OF FACT NOT APPEALING TO THE COURT OF APPEAL: PROPOSED RESPONDENT MAY BE ABLE TO HAVE A SAY IN AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL BASED ON FINDINGS OF FACT

CHALLENGING FINDINGS OF FACT NOT APPEALING TO THE COURT OF APPEAL: PROPOSED RESPONDENT MAY BE ABLE TO HAVE A SAY IN AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL BASED ON FINDINGS OF FACT

December 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Gray v Global Energy Horizons Corporation [2020] EWCA Civ 1668 the Court of Appeal expressed severe reservations about permission to appeal findings of fact having been granted.   The judgment indicates that, where findings of fact are challenged, the responding…

CIVIL PROCEDURE ROUND UP: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP: NOVEMBER 2020

CIVIL PROCEDURE ROUND UP: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP: NOVEMBER 2020

December 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Useful links

This round up covers specific posts and articles in relation to civil procedure from November 2020. COSTS ACL – Lacuna identified in criminal legal aid rules for civil committal proceedings ACL – QOCS does not apply to pre-issue applications, court rules ACL…

HOURLY RATES ALLOWED SHOULD BE INCREASED, AT LEAST, BY INFLATION: APPEAL AGAINST SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS ALLOWED.

HOURLY RATES ALLOWED SHOULD BE INCREASED, AT LEAST, BY INFLATION: APPEAL AGAINST SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS ALLOWED.

December 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

I am grateful to Sean Linley for drawing my attention to the judgment of HHJ Hodge QC in  Cohen v Fine & Ors [2020] EWHC 3278 (Ch).That judgment has some interesting things to say in relation to current hourly rates…

"WHEN MUST AN UNSUCCESSFUL LITIGANT ACCEPT "NO" FOR AN ANSWER?": COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

“WHEN MUST AN UNSUCCESSFUL LITIGANT ACCEPT “NO” FOR AN ANSWER?”: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

December 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Wingfield, R (on the application of) v Canterbury City Council & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 1588 the Court of Appeal considered the provisions of CPR 52.30 which provide an extremely limited chance of persuading a court to reconsider a…

PROVING THINGS 188: PROVING A WARNING WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE: PEDESTRIAN HIT BY CRICKET BALL LOSES CASE ON APPEAL

PROVING THINGS 188: PROVING A WARNING WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE: PEDESTRIAN HIT BY CRICKET BALL LOSES CASE ON APPEAL

November 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Lewis v Wandsworth London Borough Council [2020] EWHC 3205 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart overturned a decision in favour of claimant who had been struck by a cricket ball whilst walking near a cricket pitch.   “… the defendant was…

PROVING THINGS 187: THE CAMERA MAY LIE: THE IMPORTANCE OF DATES ON PHOTOGRAPHS

PROVING THINGS 187: THE CAMERA MAY LIE: THE IMPORTANCE OF DATES ON PHOTOGRAPHS

November 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Today we are journeying into the Family Court to look at the judgment of Mrs Justice Judd in K v G [2020] EWHC 3209 (Fam).  It shows the importance of obtaining metadata in relation to documents. In this case the…

APPEALS,  ISSUES OF FACT AND SAILING IN DIFFERENT OCEANS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE DECISION TODAY

APPEALS, ISSUES OF FACT AND SAILING IN DIFFERENT OCEANS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE DECISION TODAY

November 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

In Hewes v West Hertfordshire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust & Ors [2020] EWCA Civ 1523 the Court of Appeal reiterated the difficulties faced by an appellant attempting to argue that the judge had erred in relation to findings of the…

CLAIMANT'S CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE IT SAID TWO CONTRADICTORY THINGS: "JANUS-FACED" PLEADINGS NOT ALLOWED

CLAIMANT’S CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE IT SAID TWO CONTRADICTORY THINGS: “JANUS-FACED” PLEADINGS NOT ALLOWED

November 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

The judgment of Mr Justice Marcus Smith in Betesh Partnership -v- Evans [2020] EWHC 1589 (QB) contains interesting observations on the need for a claimant to plead a case that is not inconsistent.  I am working and citing  from the…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY, APPEALS AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CLAIMANT'S PROPOSED APPEAL COMES TO GRIEF

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY, APPEALS AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CLAIMANT’S PROPOSED APPEAL COMES TO GRIEF

November 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of Mr Justice Lavender in Kamara v Builder Depot Ltd [2020] EWHC 3046 (QB) contains a catalogue of material in relation to procedural issues and appeals.  However, here, I want to concentrate upon the issues relating to fundamental…

COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS AWARD FOR  AS TO COSTS ON ACCOUNT: WHAT IS A "REASONABLE SUM"? (£325,000 IN THIS CASE)

COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS AWARD FOR AS TO COSTS ON ACCOUNT: WHAT IS A “REASONABLE SUM”? (£325,000 IN THIS CASE)

November 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

In Mousavi-Khalkali v Abrishamchi & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 1493 we have a rare case of the Court of Appeal considering an appeal on an order that a party pay a sum on account of costs. THE CASE The Court…

SWIFT -v- CARPENTER: THE SUBSEQUENT COSTS JUDGMENT: AN ADDITIONAL £65,095.65; INDEMNITY COSTS & INCREASED INTERESTS: THE WISDOM OF MAKING A PART 36 OFFER WHEN APPEALING

November 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

On the day when it is announced that the Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal in the case of Swift -v- Carpenter it is interesting to look at the subsequent judgment on costs given today in Swift v Carpenter…

THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS: THE APPLICANT HAS TO PAY THE PRICE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR NON-PARTY COSTS ORDERS: THE APPLICANT HAS TO PAY THE PRICE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

October 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment today in Deepchand & Anor v Sooben [2020] EWCA Civ 1409 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that there be no order for costs when a party made an unsuccessful application for a non-party costs order. …

PART 36: JUDGE WAS WRONG NOT TO ALLOW ENHANCED INTEREST WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT ITS OWN OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

PART 36: JUDGE WAS WRONG NOT TO ALLOW ENHANCED INTEREST WHEN CLAIMANT BEAT ITS OWN OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

October 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

In the judgment today in Telefonica UK Ltd v The Office of Communications [2020] EWCA Civ 1374 the Court of Appeal overturned the decision of the trial judge not to award additional interest on damages and costs in a case…

SOLICITOR'S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE AFTER THEY HAD TERMINATED THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION

SOLICITOR’S FEES NOT RECOVERABLE AFTER THEY HAD TERMINATED THE CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In  Toms (t/a Goldbergs Solicitors) v Brannan [2020] EWHC 2866 (QB) Mr Justice Griffiths dismissed a solicitor’s appeal against a decision that he was not able to recover costs from a client after a conditional fee agreement had been terminated….

CLAIMANT IN LOW-VALUE PERSONAL INJURY CASE NOT ENTITLED TO RELY ON EXPERT REPORTS WHEN PROTOCOL NOT COMPLIED WITH: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL

October 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Mason -v- Laing (Bradford County Court 20th January 2020 Mason v Laing)  HHJ Gosnell held that a claimant that failed to comply with the requirements as to instructing experts prior to a Stage 3 hearing could not rely on…

← Previous 1 … 10 11 12 … 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • AN OFFER TO SETTLE THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE PROVISION FOR COSTS MAY WELL BE INEFFECTIVE: IT CERTAINLY WILL NOT LEAD TO A PETITION BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
  • IF YOU ARE ASKING FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL – MAKE SURE YOU ARE AVAILABLE…: JUDGE SAYS THE PARTIES SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THIS ISSUE
  • COST BITES 398: MORE BUDGETING IN THE MERCEDES-BENZ LITIGATION: ONLY A “MODEST” REDUCTION OF £1 MILLION HERE: BUT WHY (THE COURT ASKS) WEREN’T REALISTICALLY REDUCED FIGURES PUT FORWARD IN THE FIRST PLACE?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW: “AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS” (OH AND “WELL PADDED VANITY” (JUNE 2016
  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2026

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.