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 15
AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL:  KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE - A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL: KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE – A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

September 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

Appeals are always difficult.  The appellate court has to be persuaded that the first-instance judge was “wrong”, and this is a fairly rigorous test.  It is made far more difficult if the appellate court is given the wrong documents. Particularly…

CIVIL CONTEMPT: THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM:  THE DANGERS OF NOT FOLLOWING THE CORRECT PROCEDURE

CIVIL CONTEMPT: THE KANGAROO COURTS OF THE JUSTICE SYSTEM: THE DANGERS OF NOT FOLLOWING THE CORRECT PROCEDURE

September 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In January this year I wrote “I am starting to lose count of the number of times the Court of Appeal has overturned decisions committing people to prison because of very basic and fundamental failures of procedure.  It is as…

AN OFFER TO SETTLE FOR NO DAMAGES CAN STILL BE A VALID PART 36 OFFER: APPEAL AGAINST NO ORDER FOR COSTS ALLOWED (IN PART)

AN OFFER TO SETTLE FOR NO DAMAGES CAN STILL BE A VALID PART 36 OFFER: APPEAL AGAINST NO ORDER FOR COSTS ALLOWED (IN PART)

August 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In MR v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2019] EWHC 1970 (QB) Mrs Justice McGowan allowed an appeal as to costs in a issue relating to Part 36. She held that the trial judge had erred in making no…

PART 8 PROCEDURE USED FOR CLAIM FOR £2.6 MILLION: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF - IS ANYONE SURPRISED?

PART 8 PROCEDURE USED FOR CLAIM FOR £2.6 MILLION: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF – IS ANYONE SURPRISED?

August 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

A common practice has occurred of issuing Part 8 proceedings under the MOJ Protocol and “parking” cases there for an extended period.  This is an extremely dangerous practice.  It is even more dangerous if the case that has been parked…

COURT OF APPEAL ORDER RETRIAL FOLLOWING JUDGE'S FAILURE TO GIVE ADEQUATE REASONS: THE "BUILDING BLOCKS" OF FACT FINDING

COURT OF APPEAL ORDER RETRIAL FOLLOWING JUDGE’S FAILURE TO GIVE ADEQUATE REASONS: THE “BUILDING BLOCKS” OF FACT FINDING

August 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Attempts to appeal findings of fact are extremely common, so common that I have stopped writing about them.  There is also a common theme – the judge should not have found that, says the appellant: it was a finding open…

FIXED COSTS: APPLY TO DEFENDANTS AS WELL: SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE AND THE GANDER

FIXED COSTS: APPLY TO DEFENDANTS AS WELL: SAUCE FOR THE GOOSE AND THE GANDER

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me a copy of consent order made in the Court of Appeal.   The Court allowed an appeal, by consent, that the defendant to certain applications was only allowed fixed costs in an…

DELAY OF 18 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT DID NOT UNDERMINE THE JUDGE'S VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY

DELAY OF 18 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT DID NOT UNDERMINE THE JUDGE’S VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Nuttal & Anor v Kerr & Anor [2019] EWHC 1977 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman rejected an argument that an excessive delay in giving judgment meant that the trial judge’s conclusions were innately unreliable.  (The judgment also reviews the authorities…

BUNDLES AGAIN: DOUBLE SIDED BUNDLES - A MUST AT TRIAL - A NO, NO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (DOES NOBODY THINK OF THE TREES...)

BUNDLES AGAIN: DOUBLE SIDED BUNDLES – A MUST AT TRIAL – A NO, NO IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (DOES NOBODY THINK OF THE TREES…)

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Members Content

  There was much excitement about the rules changes so that bundles for applications and trials should be double-sided.  However nothing is consistent in legal procedure. I am grateful to barrister Matt Jackson for sending me a (highly redacted) copy…

RAISING NEW ISSUES ON APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS THE LAW: CIRCUIT JUDGE CORRECT TO ALLOW NEW ISSUE TO BE ARGUED IN RELATION TO INTEREST RATES

RAISING NEW ISSUES ON APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS THE LAW: CIRCUIT JUDGE CORRECT TO ALLOW NEW ISSUE TO BE ARGUED IN RELATION TO INTEREST RATES

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content

In Notting Hill Finance Ltd v Sheikh [2019] EWCA Civ 1337 the Court of Appeal reviewed the principles relating to new matters being raised on appeal.     “These authorities show that there is no general rule that a case…

ANOTHER POST ON THE AUTHORITIES BUNDLE: THE SUPREME COURT SAY THEY SHOULD BE IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER: GUIDANCE FROM THE NICE LAWYERS OF TWITTER

July 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Members Content

Earlier today I reported on a comment from the Court of Appeal that it did not help for authorities to be placed in alphabetical order.  I commented on the absence of clear guidance.  Here we look at the views from…

A SECOND POST ABOUT BUNDLES OF AUTHORITIES: SORTING OF AUTHORITIES BY ALPHABETICAL ORDER NOT HELPFUL: COMMENTS FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY

A SECOND POST ABOUT BUNDLES OF AUTHORITIES: SORTING OF AUTHORITIES BY ALPHABETICAL ORDER NOT HELPFUL: COMMENTS FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY

July 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Members Content

The Court of Appeal adjourned the hearing today in Swift -v- Carpenter.  Looking at the footage at 1.04 you can see a comment by the court in relation to the bundle of authorities.   THE BUNDLE WAS IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER…

NO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO RECOVER £25,000 FOR LEADING COUNSEL TO ATTEND A LOW LEVEL HEARING  - NOT EVEN ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

NO YOU ARE NOT GOING TO RECOVER £25,000 FOR LEADING COUNSEL TO ATTEND A LOW LEVEL HEARING – NOT EVEN ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

July 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Timokhina v Timokhin [2019] EWCA Civ 1284 the Court of Appeal overturned an order that a mother pay counsel’s fees of certain hearings. The judgment is interesting in that costs were disallowed (inter partes) as unreasonable even when the…

PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In West -v- Stockport NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWCA Civ 1220 the Court of Appeal considered the question of proportionality in relation to clinical negligence actions and the “recoverable” element of ATE insurance.  I am grateful to Sean Linley for…

PREPARE A NON-COMPLIANT BUNDLE OF AUTHORITIES: THE RISKS OF COSTS BEING DISALLOWED: COURT OF APPEAL SOUNDS A WARNING

PREPARE A NON-COMPLIANT BUNDLE OF AUTHORITIES: THE RISKS OF COSTS BEING DISALLOWED: COURT OF APPEAL SOUNDS A WARNING

July 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Case Management, Members Content

In  the judgment today in Parr v Keystone Healthcare Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1246 Lord Justice Lewison expressed concerns about the failure to follow the Practice Direction on the citation of authorities.   THE CASE The Court of…

APPEAL ON COSTS BUDGETING : CLAIMANT'S APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL: AN OFFER AS TO COSTS DOES NOT BECOME THE BENCHMARK FIGURE

APPEAL ON COSTS BUDGETING : CLAIMANT’S APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL: AN OFFER AS TO COSTS DOES NOT BECOME THE BENCHMARK FIGURE

July 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

In Gray v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2019] EWHC 1780 (QB) Mr Justice Lambert dismissed the claimant’s appeal from cost budgeting decisions.    The judgment contains important observations about the nature of cost budgeting hearings and appeals on…

THE GENERAL DUTY ON LAWYERS TO INFORM THE COURT IF IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE TIME ESTIMATE IS INCORRECT

THE GENERAL DUTY ON LAWYERS TO INFORM THE COURT IF IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE TIME ESTIMATE IS INCORRECT

July 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a judgment today on BAILLI in a family case. The case appears to be subject to reporting restrictions so I do not propose to link to it, or even name it, until these are clarified.  However what is…

"A BIT OF A SHORT BALL": STATING THE JUDGE'S PRELIMINARY VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO BIAS

“A BIT OF A SHORT BALL”: STATING THE JUDGE’S PRELIMINARY VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY DOES NOT AMOUNT TO BIAS

July 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content

There is an interesting discussion as to Judicial bias in the judgment of Mrs Justice Theis in X v Y (Permission to Appeal) [2019] EWHC 1713 (Fam). “The interjections by the judge during the hearing should be viewed not as…

THE TRIAL JUDGE COULD SAY BULLOCKS TO THE COST ORDER: ON APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO BULLISH

THE TRIAL JUDGE COULD SAY BULLOCKS TO THE COST ORDER: ON APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SO BULLISH

July 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  Fouladi v Darout Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 1674 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr refused an appeal against the making of a “Bullock” order in relation to the costs of a fourth defendant.  The claimant, however, was not successful…

INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: REASONS FOR REFUSING PERMISSION NOW AVAILABLE ON LINE

INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: REASONS FOR REFUSING PERMISSION NOW AVAILABLE ON LINE

July 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

I wrote on the judgment in  I – interim payment of costs.  in an earlier post . I subsequently wrote that the defendant had been refused permission to appeal. The reasons are available on the Switalskis website, here. ” it seems entirely…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 50: THE POSTS SO FAR

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 50: THE POSTS SO FAR

July 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Experts, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

The “back to basics” series has been going since April 2018.  It has covered a surprising amount of topics. From how to draft an application to “litigation wishful thinking”.   Some people have expressed surprise and how “basic” some points are…

INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

June 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content, Personal Injury

I wrote on the judgment in  I – interim payment of costs.  in an earlier post.  An article on the Switalskis website today states that the Court of Appeal refused the defendant’s application for permission to appeal.( I know that the…

EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE SET ASIDE: THE DANGERS OF SEEKING TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF A CLAIM FORM ON A WITHOUT NOTICE BASIS - EXEMPLIFIED

EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE SET ASIDE: THE DANGERS OF SEEKING TO EXTEND THE LIFE OF A CLAIM FORM ON A WITHOUT NOTICE BASIS – EXEMPLIFIED

June 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Al-Zahra (PVT) Hospital & Ors v DDM [2019] EWCA Civ 1103 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by defendants who objected to an extension of time being granted for service of the claim form.  It is an object…

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN APPEAL IN RECOVERING ADDITIONAL 10% IN DAMAGES WHEN OWN OFFER WAS BEATEN: THE ADDITIONAL AWARD SHOULD NOT BE CATEGORISED AS A "BONUS"

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL IN APPEAL IN RECOVERING ADDITIONAL 10% IN DAMAGES WHEN OWN OFFER WAS BEATEN: THE ADDITIONAL AWARD SHOULD NOT BE CATEGORISED AS A “BONUS”

June 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In  JLE v Warrington & Halton Hospitals NHS Trust Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1582 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart overturned an order of the Master who declined to award the claimant an additional 10% in costs when they had beat their…

CLAIMANT LAWYERS: YOU MUST KNOW THE RULES RELATING TO SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: YOU CAN'T EXPECT THE DEFENDANT TO HELP YOU OUT

CLAIMANT LAWYERS: YOU MUST KNOW THE RULES RELATING TO SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: YOU CAN’T EXPECT THE DEFENDANT TO HELP YOU OUT

June 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

One guarantee for anyone writing about civil procedure is that there will be a regular supply of what Master McCloud has described as ” a dry and unlovely crop of procedural service issues”,  The Court of Appeal decision in Woodward…

APPEAL AGAINST DISPROPORTIONAL COSTS FAILS: REASONABLE TO USE LEADING COUNSEL IN A £25,000 CLAIM

APPEAL AGAINST DISPROPORTIONAL COSTS FAILS: REASONABLE TO USE LEADING COUNSEL IN A £25,000 CLAIM

June 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In East Sussex Fire And Rescue Service v Austin [2019] EWHC 1455 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert dismissed the defendant’s (paying party) appeal. The defendant argued that costs were disproportional, that the use of leading counsel was unreasonable  – as was…

ATTEMPTING TO OBTAIN EXTENSIONS OF TIME BY INFORMAL EMAIL : THE COURT TAKES A "SINGULARLY DIM VIEW" OF ATTEMPTS BY PARTIES TO CIRCUMVENT THE RULES (OH, AND BUNDLES AGAIN)

ATTEMPTING TO OBTAIN EXTENSIONS OF TIME BY INFORMAL EMAIL : THE COURT TAKES A “SINGULARLY DIM VIEW” OF ATTEMPTS BY PARTIES TO CIRCUMVENT THE RULES (OH, AND BUNDLES AGAIN)

June 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Access to justice, Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Case Management, Conduct, Extensions of time, Members Content

In Saint Benedict Land Trust Ltd v London Borough of Camden & Anor [2019] EWHC 1433 (Ch) (17 May 2019) Mr Justice Marcus Smith took a very dim view indeed of an attempt by a litigant to obtain an extension…

PROPORTIONALITY: A WARNING AGAINST A "CLIENT-CENTRIC" APPROACH: £74,000 REDUCED TO £15,000: HIGH COURT CASE ON APPEAL

PROPORTIONALITY: A WARNING AGAINST A “CLIENT-CENTRIC” APPROACH: £74,000 REDUCED TO £15,000: HIGH COURT CASE ON APPEAL

June 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In Malmsten v Bohinc [2019] EWHC 1386 (Ch) Mr Justice Marcus Smith allowed a paying party’s appeal in an assessment and reduced a bill from £74,328.90 to £15,000.  There is a detailed consideration of how the proportionality test should be…

FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE TASK OF THE TRIAL JUDGE: A REASONED DETERMINATION OF THE DISPUTE ON THE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL - NOT A SEARCH FOR "THE TRUTH"

FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE TASK OF THE TRIAL JUDGE: A REASONED DETERMINATION OF THE DISPUTE ON THE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL – NOT A SEARCH FOR “THE TRUTH”

June 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There has been a spate of cases recently relating to appeals of findings of fact by a trial judge. There are major problems in such appeals, this is illustrated by the judgment of Mr Justice Andrew Baker in Auliffe &…

"VERY UNFORTUNATELY, ON TWO OCCASIONS... THE ... JUDGE FELL ASLEEP": APPEAL ALLOWED

“VERY UNFORTUNATELY, ON TWO OCCASIONS… THE … JUDGE FELL ASLEEP”: APPEAL ALLOWED

May 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Members Content

In Science Museum Group v Wess [2019] UKEAT 0260 HHJ Auberach made a finding that the Employment Judge had fallen asleep. The appeal was allowed on this ground alone. “I find as a fact that, very unfortunately, on the afternoon…

DRAFT JUDGMENTS "ARE NOT AN INVITATION TO TREAT": COURT OF APPEAL SEEKS TO PUT AN END TO REQUEST THAT ARE "CONFRONTATIONAL AND DISRESPECTFUL"

DRAFT JUDGMENTS “ARE NOT AN INVITATION TO TREAT”: COURT OF APPEAL SEEKS TO PUT AN END TO REQUEST THAT ARE “CONFRONTATIONAL AND DISRESPECTFUL”

May 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content

In I Children [2019] EWCA Civ 898 the Court of Appeal gave clear guidance to practitioners who write to the court seeking “clarification” of a written judgment.  There are clear parameters and the parties should not use the draft judgment…

COURT OF APPEAL: NOT TOO KEEN ON PERMISSION BEING GRANTED FOR "ACADEMIC" ARGUMENTS

COURT OF APPEAL: NOT TOO KEEN ON PERMISSION BEING GRANTED FOR “ACADEMIC” ARGUMENTS

May 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

In J-S (Children) [2019] EWCA Civ 894, the Court of Appeal declined to hear an argument that was “academic”. It also gave guidance to judges when considering applications for permission to appeal on the “other compelling reason for an appeal”…

PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE RELEVANT TEST: NO REQUIREMENT THAT SUCCESS BE PROBABLE  OR MORE LIKELY THAN NOT

PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE RELEVANT TEST: NO REQUIREMENT THAT SUCCESS BE PROBABLE OR MORE LIKELY THAN NOT

May 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content

In  R (A Child) [2019] EWCA Civ 895 the Court of Appeal set out the criteria for permission for appeal. “The test for the grant of permission to appeal on an application to the Court of Appeal or to the…

ANOTHER TRIAL BUNDLE CASE: ACTION STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO PREPARE TRIAL BUNDLE: APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT DISMISSED

ANOTHER TRIAL BUNDLE CASE: ACTION STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO PREPARE TRIAL BUNDLE: APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT DISMISSED

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Al-Balhaa v Raphael & Ors [2019] EWHC 1323 (QB) Mr Justice Nicol upheld a finding that the action was struck out because of the claimant’s failure to prepare a trial bundle and relief from sanctions should not be granted. …

APPELLANT'S COSTS OF APPEAL WERE "MANIFESTLY UNREASONABLE" : COURT OF APPEAL  REDUCES £71,072 SCHEDULE TO £13,000

APPELLANT’S COSTS OF APPEAL WERE “MANIFESTLY UNREASONABLE” : COURT OF APPEAL REDUCES £71,072 SCHEDULE TO £13,000

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

A short postcript to the Court of Appeal judgment in Jofa Ltd & Anor v Benherst Finance Ltd & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 899 makes some telling remarks about the cost of appeals. “the amount of costs claimed by the…

PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS THAT STATES IT IS "EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST" IS STILL A VALID OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

PART 36 OFFER ON COSTS THAT STATES IT IS “EXCLUSIVE OF INTEREST” IS STILL A VALID OFFER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to barrister Jamie Carpenter for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Nicol in Horne -v- Prescot (No 1) Ltd 2019 1322 (QB). The case relates to whether a Part 36 offer on costs,…

DECISION OVERTURNED BECAUSE OF UNFAIR JUDICIAL TREATMENT: "TAKING UP THE CUDGELS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION"

DECISION OVERTURNED BECAUSE OF UNFAIR JUDICIAL TREATMENT: “TAKING UP THE CUDGELS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION”

May 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Appeals, Case Management, Members Content

There are few cases that are overturned on the grounds of unfair judicial treatment. However this was one of grounds the appeal was allowed today in Serafin v Malkiewicz & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 852 “On numerous occasions, the Judge…

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: THE UPHILL BATTLE

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: THE UPHILL BATTLE

May 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Staechelin & Ors v ACLBDD Holdings Ltd & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 817 Lord Justice Lewison set out  a “cut out and keep” guide for parties attempting to appeal findings of fact. A reminder of the uphill battle that appellants…

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: SEEKING FURTHER INFORMATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF EXPERT EVIDENCE

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: SEEKING FURTHER INFORMATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF EXPERT EVIDENCE

May 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content

I am grateful to Charles Bagot QC for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Price -v-  Cwm Taf University Health Board  [2019] EWHC 938 (QB).   A transcript of the case is available on the…

DEFENDANT'S PART 36 OFFER WAS VALID: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLD OFFER THAT REFERRED TO UNPLEADED COUNTERCLAIM AND SOUGHT 8% INTEREST AFTER EXPIRY

DEFENDANT’S PART 36 OFFER WAS VALID: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLD OFFER THAT REFERRED TO UNPLEADED COUNTERCLAIM AND SOUGHT 8% INTEREST AFTER EXPIRY

May 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Calonne Construction Ltd v Dawnus Southern Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 754 the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a defendant’s Part 36 offer was a valid one. The offer related to a counterclaim that had yet to be…

COURT COULD NOT GO OUTSIDE FIXED COSTS REGIME: HOWEVER AN ORDER SEEKING INDEMNITY COSTS IS NOT AN "INTERIM" APPLICATION

COURT COULD NOT GO OUTSIDE FIXED COSTS REGIME: HOWEVER AN ORDER SEEKING INDEMNITY COSTS IS NOT AN “INTERIM” APPLICATION

May 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose    for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mrs Justice Carr in Parsa -v- D.S. Smith PLC (25th March 2019)  Parsa v D.S. Smith PLC – Approved Judgment -…

DOES THE BASIC LAW OF EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE RUN IN THE IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION UPPER TRIBUNAL? A MATTER OF CONCERN TO US ALL

DOES THE BASIC LAW OF EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE RUN IN THE IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION UPPER TRIBUNAL? A MATTER OF CONCERN TO US ALL

April 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The Immigration Upper Tribunal does not appear to recognise some of the basic principles of civil evidence and appellate jurisdiction.  Certainly this is the impression you get when reading the judgment of Lord Justice Davis in Palash v Secretary of…

FIXED COSTS, CASES OVER £25,000, EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BASKET OF CASES

FIXED COSTS, CASES OVER £25,000, EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE BASKET OF CASES

April 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

In Ferri v Gill [2019] EWHC 952 (QB)Mr Justice Stewart considered the relevant criteria to be applied when a claimant argued that fixed costs should not be applied to a case that had started in the portal but was settled…

FIXED COSTS WHEN A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION SETTLES FOR MORE THAN £25,000: "NEW RULES" TO BE APPLIED AND FIXED COSTS APPLY

FIXED COSTS WHEN A PERSONAL INJURY ACTION SETTLES FOR MORE THAN £25,000: “NEW RULES” TO BE APPLIED AND FIXED COSTS APPLY

April 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to  Matthew Hoe from Taylor Rose TTKW  for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Sephton QC in  Lovatt -v- Lew Diecastings Ltd (County Court in Manchester, 4th December 2018).  Lovatt v LEW Diecastings Ltd…

BARRISTERS' FEES ARE "PROPERTY": COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY (A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE TOO...)

BARRISTERS’ FEES ARE “PROPERTY”: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY (A HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE TOO…)

April 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Gwinnutt v George & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 656 the Court of Appeal held that a barrister’s fees (paid under the old pre-contractual arrangements) were, in fact,  “property” (at least for the purpose of insolvency).  There is also an…

AN UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO APPEAL  JUDGE'S EXERCISE OF DISCRETION  UNDER S.33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANT

AN UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO APPEAL JUDGE’S EXERCISE OF DISCRETION UNDER S.33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANT

April 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In HMG3 Ltd & Anor v Dunn [2019] EWHC 882 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip upheld the findings of a Circuit Judge who exercised their discretion under Section 33 in favour of a claimant. THE CASE The claim is brought by…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHERE MONEY PAID 17 HOURS LATE:"A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE IS NECESSARY"

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHERE MONEY PAID 17 HOURS LATE:”A SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE IS NECESSARY”

April 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Summary assessment,

In Khandanpour v Chambers [2019] EWCA Civ 570 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal in relation to a refusal to give relief from sanctions.  A delay in payment of 17 hours of part of the moneys ordered by the…

AMENDMENT, FOOTBALL AND THE ALLEGEDLY NEGLIGENT SOLICITOR: SIX KEY POINTS (WITH THE LAST ONE BEING THE MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL)

AMENDMENT, FOOTBALL AND THE ALLEGEDLY NEGLIGENT SOLICITOR: SIX KEY POINTS (WITH THE LAST ONE BEING THE MOST IMPORTANT OF ALL)

April 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

There are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Jenkins v JCP Solicitors Ltd [2019] EWHC 852 (QB). 1. It provides yet another example of a claimant suing the wrong entity The firm of solicitors…

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

PERSONAL INJURY SUCCESS FEES: REDUCTION TO 15% CONFIRMED BY COURT OF APPEAL: ATE INSURANCE IS RECOVERABLE AS A DISBURSEMENT

April 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Herbert v H H Law Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 527 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision on a solicitor and own client assessment that the additional liability in a simple personal injury case should be 15%. It allowed…

COSTS, MEDICAL AGENCIES, VAT:  SOLICITORS CAN RECOVER VAT PAID TO MEDICAL AGENCIES ON ASSESSMENT

COSTS, MEDICAL AGENCIES, VAT: SOLICITORS CAN RECOVER VAT PAID TO MEDICAL AGENCIES ON ASSESSMENT

April 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In British Airways Plc v Prosser [2019] EWCA Civ 547 the Court of Appeal considered whether it was appropriate for a claimant’s solicitor to recover the costs of VAT paid to medical agencies. THE CASE The claimant succeeded in a…

TOO MANY DOCUMENTS, TOO MANY AUTHORITIES: A REMINDER OF AN OLD FASHIONED REMEDY: BEWARE YE, BEWARE YE

TOO MANY DOCUMENTS, TOO MANY AUTHORITIES: A REMINDER OF AN OLD FASHIONED REMEDY: BEWARE YE, BEWARE YE

March 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Written advocacy

When commenting on a recent case about committal in the Court of Appeal Professor Dominic Regan made the point that the first part of the hearing had been marked by judicial comments about the size of the bundles and number…

← Previous 1 … 14 15 16 … 20 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

  • THE DUTY OF FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: USEFUL GUIDANCE AND AN ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST WHEN MAKING AN APPLICATION TO SERVE OUT…
  • A COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE: ANOTHER CASE THAT EMPHASISES THE IMPORTANCE OF FAIR PRESENTATION AT THESE APPLICATIONS: A LAWYER CANNOT SIMPLY PROMOTE A “CONSPIRACY THEORY” BUT MOST ACT OBJECTIVELY AND CAREFULLY
  • THE REPLY: THE THEME OF THE DAY: SIX USEFUL CHECKLISTS: MAKING SURE YOUR PLEADING DOESN’T FAIL THE BASIC TESTS
  • DRAFTING A DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: SOME IMPORTANT POINTS: YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CPR 16 AND DO IT FULLY AND PROPERLY
  • DRAFTING A REPLY: WHAT IT SHOULD CONTAIN AND WHAT IT SHOULD NOT: THE KEY ISSUES CONSIDERED

Top Posts

THE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AND ONE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: DECISION TO STRIKE OUT ALLOWED ON APPEAL BECAUSE THE JUDGE HAD WRONGLY CONSIDERED THE MERITS
COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS...)
EXPERT WATCH 71: "I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE": THE EXPERT WAS "ADVOCATING" AND "HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL"
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (3): AI AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: VERY DANGEROUS BEDFELLOWS: TWENTY KEY POINTS
CLAIM AGAINST A SOLICITOR WAS STRUCK OUT: THERE HAD BEEN NUMEROUS PROCEDURAL DEFAULT AND THESE WOULD HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN...

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.