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 7
THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE TO ALLOW A "NEW POINT" TO BE TAKEN ON APPEAL: DON'T FORGET PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT...

THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE TO ALLOW A “NEW POINT” TO BE TAKEN ON APPEAL: DON’T FORGET PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT…

November 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Azhar v All Money Matters t/a TFC Home Loans [2023] EWCA Civ 1341 the Court of Appeal rejected a defendant’s argument that it should have been permitted to raise a “new” point on appeal.  The matter upon which the…

COST BITES 120:  QOCS AND HIRE CHARGES: DECISION THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS OUTSIDE QOCS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

COST BITES 120: QOCS AND HIRE CHARGES: DECISION THAT CLAIMANT SHOULD PAY COSTS OUTSIDE QOCS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

November 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

In Amjad v UK Insurance Ltd [2023] EWHC 2832 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie overturned a decision that the QOCS cap should be lifted in relation to a claimant who had failed to beat the defendant’s Part 36 offer and who…

COST BITES 116: YOU CAN'T AVOID PAYING THE COSTS OF AN APPLICATION AND APPEAL JUST BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T IN THE COSTS BUDGET...

COST BITES 116: YOU CAN’T AVOID PAYING THE COSTS OF AN APPLICATION AND APPEAL JUST BECAUSE THEY WEREN’T IN THE COSTS BUDGET…

November 10, 2023 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We have seen some “interesting” submissions in relation to costs on this blog.  However one of the most novel is the point taken by the Third Party in  South Tees Development Corporation & Anor v PD Teesport Ltd & Anor…

"RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS" NOT REQUIRED: COURT  OF APPEAL CONSIDER WHEN CPR 3.9 CRITERIA APPLY: ITS NOT ALWAYS PLANE SAILING...

“RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS” NOT REQUIRED: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDER WHEN CPR 3.9 CRITERIA APPLY: ITS NOT ALWAYS PLANE SAILING…

November 9, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  Lufthansa Technik AG v Panasonic Avionics Corporation & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 1273 the Court of Appeal addressed the difficult issue of when a breach led to a need to apply from relief from sanctions.   It found that, on…

PROVING THINGS 235: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF DEFENDANT: THE JUDGE'S FINDINGS WERE NOT OPEN TO HIM: THE FACTUAL FINDINGS WERE WRONG

PROVING THINGS 235: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF DEFENDANT: THE JUDGE’S FINDINGS WERE NOT OPEN TO HIM: THE FACTUAL FINDINGS WERE WRONG

November 7, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal judgment today in Clements-Siddall v Dunbobbin Hotels Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 1300 is a rare example of the Court of Appeal overturning a judge’s findings on the facts.  It is also an example of the importance…

A SECOND ACTION ON A DIFFERENT ISSUE TO THE FIRST SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO KEEN ON "SHADOW BOXING" IN CIVIL LITIGATION

A SECOND ACTION ON A DIFFERENT ISSUE TO THE FIRST SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL NOT TOO KEEN ON “SHADOW BOXING” IN CIVIL LITIGATION

November 6, 2023 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Orji & Anor v Nagra & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 1289 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision that an action should be struck out as an abuse of process.  The Court rejected the defendant’s contention that the action…

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON'T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON'T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON’T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON’T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

October 31, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in  Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB) shows a surprising set of facts when an expert wrote directly to the court.  The expert made it clear that he was not…

COST BITES 107: A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER SHOULD NOT BE MADE AGAINST A SOLICITOR REPRESENTING A CLAIM ON A CFA BASIS: SEEKING A FINANCIAL BENEFIT DID NOT MEAN THEY WERE ACTING OUTSIDE THEIR ROLE AS SOLICITOR

COST BITES 107: A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER SHOULD NOT BE MADE AGAINST A SOLICITOR REPRESENTING A CLAIM ON A CFA BASIS: SEEKING A FINANCIAL BENEFIT DID NOT MEAN THEY WERE ACTING OUTSIDE THEIR ROLE AS SOLICITOR

October 17, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, QOCS

I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Freedman in The Scout Association -v- Bolt Burdon Kemp [2023] EWHC 2575 (KB). On appeal Freedman J upheld the…

SOLICITORS CAN'T RECOVER COSTS UNDER AN UNENFORCEABLE CFA: WHAT IS MORE THE CLIENTS CAN RECOVER SUMS BACK

SOLICITORS CAN’T RECOVER COSTS UNDER AN UNENFORCEABLE CFA: WHAT IS MORE THE CLIENTS CAN RECOVER SUMS BACK

October 16, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Diag Human SE & Anor v Volterra Fietta (Re Assessment Under Part III Solicitors Act 1974) [2023] EWCA Civ 1107 the Court of Appeal upheld earlier judgments that solicitors, acting under a conditional fee agreement that claimed more than…

COST BITES 106: BARRISTERS BEWARE:  COUNSEL ON DIRECT ACCESS NOT ENTITLED TO RECOVER COSTS FROM THEIR (FORMER) CLIENT: AN UNFAIR TERM MEANT THEY WERE ENTITLED TO NOTHING

COST BITES 106: BARRISTERS BEWARE: COUNSEL ON DIRECT ACCESS NOT ENTITLED TO RECOVER COSTS FROM THEIR (FORMER) CLIENT: AN UNFAIR TERM MEANT THEY WERE ENTITLED TO NOTHING

October 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in  Glaser & Anor v Atay [2023] EWHC 2539 (KB) is one that needs to be looked at by every barrister involved in direct access work, and their clerks.   The judge found that a…

THE CIVIL COURTS ARE "NOT THE WILD WEST": ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ARGUMENTS ON APPEAL REJECTED: SKELETON ARGUMENT SHOULD HAVE DEALT WITH POINTS THE DEFENDANT NOW WANTED TO ARGUE

THE CIVIL COURTS ARE “NOT THE WILD WEST”: ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ARGUMENTS ON APPEAL REJECTED: SKELETON ARGUMENT SHOULD HAVE DEALT WITH POINTS THE DEFENDANT NOW WANTED TO ARGUE

September 28, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Written advocacy

We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Morgan-Rowe v Woodgate [2023] EWHC 2375 (KB).  This looks at the judge’s view of attempting to run an argument that was not made at trial (indeed, in part, admitted…

A TARGETED FORM OF ILLEGALITY AS A DEFENCE TO DAMAGES: CAR DRIVER WHO HAD NO MOT FOR DAMAGED CAR COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS OF HIRE OF ALTERNATIVE VEHICLE

A TARGETED FORM OF ILLEGALITY AS A DEFENCE TO DAMAGES: CAR DRIVER WHO HAD NO MOT FOR DAMAGED CAR COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS OF HIRE OF ALTERNATIVE VEHICLE

September 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content

In Ali v HSF Logistics Polska SP ZOO [2023] EWHC 2159 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the question of whether there was a “targeted” defence of illegality to a claim for damages which was not as all embracing as…

BACK TO BASICS 98: COPYING THE OTHER SIDE INTO CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE COURT: IT IS DANGEROUS TO ASSUME THAT THESE ARE "ADMINISTRATIVE" MATTERS

BACK TO BASICS 98: COPYING THE OTHER SIDE INTO CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE COURT: IT IS DANGEROUS TO ASSUME THAT THESE ARE “ADMINISTRATIVE” MATTERS

September 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Justin Bates for drawing my attention to the final paragraphs of the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in Debenham-Schon v Anchor Hanover Group [2021] EWHC 3023 (QB).   It concerns the duty of a litigant to…

TRIAL JUDGE'S FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY OVERTURNED: BECAUSE THE DISHONESTY WAS NOT "FUNDAMENTAL"

TRIAL JUDGE’S FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY OVERTURNED: BECAUSE THE DISHONESTY WAS NOT “FUNDAMENTAL”

August 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In  Denzil v Mohammed & Anor [2023] EWHC 2077 (KB) Mr Justice Freedman overturned a finding by a trial judge that a claimant had been fundamentally dishonest.  The finding that a minor head injury which was not part of the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, PART 18 QUESTIONS AND CASE MANAGEMENT: THE MASTER WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO DISCLOSE HIS WITNESS EVIDENCE FIRST

WITNESS STATEMENTS, PART 18 QUESTIONS AND CASE MANAGEMENT: THE MASTER WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO DISCLOSE HIS WITNESS EVIDENCE FIRST

August 9, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

It has taken to the third time of writing about the decision in  Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB) to get to the detail of what the appeal was actually about.  This part of the judgment is important…

ISSUING HIGH VALUE PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: LOCAL IS USUALLY BEST: HIGH COURT DECISION

ISSUING HIGH VALUE PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: LOCAL IS USUALLY BEST: HIGH COURT DECISION

August 7, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Members Content

I am grateful to all those readers who brought my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in  Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB), in particular to the section on the wisdom of issuing in local…

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY TO APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENTS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY TO APPLICATIONS TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENTS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

July 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

In FXF v English Karate Federation Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 891 the Court of Appeal stated, categorically, that the Denton principles must be considered where a defendant applies to set aside a default judgment.  Firstly there was binding…

A MULTI-LINGUAL WITNESS IS NOT COMPELLED TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN THEIR "FIRST LANGUAGE": DECISION PREVENTING CLAIMANT GIVING EVIDENCE OVERTURNED ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT

A MULTI-LINGUAL WITNESS IS NOT COMPELLED TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN THEIR “FIRST LANGUAGE”: DECISION PREVENTING CLAIMANT GIVING EVIDENCE OVERTURNED ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT

July 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to Ten Legal Associates Ltd for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Afzal -v- UK Insurance Ltd [2023] EWHC 1730 (KB), a copy of that judgment is available here.  AFZALJUDGMENT TRANSCRIPT …

COST BITES 95: A SOLICITOR'S BILL IS "PAID" WHEN FUNDS ARE DEDUCTED FROM DAMAGES AND A COMPLIANT BILL SENT TO THE CLIENT

COST BITES 95: A SOLICITOR’S BILL IS “PAID” WHEN FUNDS ARE DEDUCTED FROM DAMAGES AND A COMPLIANT BILL SENT TO THE CLIENT

July 14, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

NB this decision was overturned by the Supreme Court. See the discussion on the Supreme Court decision here.  In Menzies v Oakwood Solicitors Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 844 the Court of Appeal held that a solicitors bill is “paid” when…

JUST LET GO: COURTS CANNOT FORCE A LITIGATION FRIEND TO KEEP ON ACTING: HIGH COURT DECISION

JUST LET GO: COURTS CANNOT FORCE A LITIGATION FRIEND TO KEEP ON ACTING: HIGH COURT DECISION

July 4, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Major v Kirishana [2023] EWHC 1593 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter allowed an appeal in which  a judge had refused a Litigation Friend’s application to terminate their appointment.   The judgment makes it clear that there will be very few circumstances…

PROVING THINGS 229: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE CERTAIN HEADS OF DAMAGES: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

PROVING THINGS 229: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE CERTAIN HEADS OF DAMAGES: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

June 30, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Lal v Reeder [2023] EWHC 1437 (KB) is a classic example of a failure to prove things.  The trial judge found that the claimant had failed to establish certain heads of damage. That…

PART 36, LATE ACCEPTANCE AND QOCS: COURT OF APPEAL DECIDE AN UNUSUAL ISSUE: A COURT CANNOT MAKE AN ORDER PROTECTING A PARTY AGAINST A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN THE RULES

PART 36, LATE ACCEPTANCE AND QOCS: COURT OF APPEAL DECIDE AN UNUSUAL ISSUE: A COURT CANNOT MAKE AN ORDER PROTECTING A PARTY AGAINST A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN THE RULES

June 29, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Part 36, QOCS

In Tabbitt v Clark [2023] EWCA Civ 744 the Court of Appeal rejected an application for a declaration that would have “future proofed” the claimant’s position in relation to liability for costs following late acceptance of the defendant’s Part 36…

"GIVEN THE INCOMPETENT WAY THE LITIGATION HAD BEEN CONDUCTED TO DATE": CIRCUIT JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE AND ADJOURNMENT AND RIGHT IN STRIKING OUT THE CLAIM

“GIVEN THE INCOMPETENT WAY THE LITIGATION HAD BEEN CONDUCTED TO DATE”: CIRCUIT JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE AND ADJOURNMENT AND RIGHT IN STRIKING OUT THE CLAIM

June 28, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Striking out

In Brem v Clark & Anor [2023] EWHC 1358 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer dismissed an appeal against a decision to strike out an action.  The claimant’s counsel failed to attend at the hearing, but the judge was correct to…

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM ISSUE: NO SEAL NO CASE: "SERVICE MEANS HAVING A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN HAND WHICH CAN BE PROVIDED TO THE DEFENDANT"

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM ISSUE: NO SEAL NO CASE: “SERVICE MEANS HAVING A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN HAND WHICH CAN BE PROVIDED TO THE DEFENDANT”

June 28, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Court fees, Members Content, Service of the claim form

In Clewer v Higgs & Sons (a firm) [2023] EWHC 1556 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson upheld a decision that the claimants had failed to serve a claim form properly.  The judge held that the requirement to serve a sealed…

CLAIMANTS COME TO GRIEF OVER SERVICE OF UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: COURT OF APPEAL HOLD THAT CPR 3.10 APPLIES TO DEFENDANT'S MISCARACTERISED APPLICATION

CLAIMANTS COME TO GRIEF OVER SERVICE OF UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: COURT OF APPEAL HOLD THAT CPR 3.10 APPLIES TO DEFENDANT’S MISCARACTERISED APPLICATION

June 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form

It is rarely possible to get to the end of a month without some kind of discussion on this blog about service of the claim form. This month is no exception. In Pitalia & Anor v NHS England [2023] EWCA…

3,450 CLAIMANTS CAN USE THE SAME CLAIM FORM: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION ON CPR 7.3.

3,450 CLAIMANTS CAN USE THE SAME CLAIM FORM: DIVISIONAL COURT DECISION ON CPR 7.3.

June 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am grateful to David Platt KC for sending me a copy of the decision of the Divisional Court in Abbott -v- Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 1475 (KB). The Court overturned a previous decision of a Master and allowed…

THE DANGERS OF ACCIDENTALLY DISCLOSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE OFFERS: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS "HANDED A BOOBY-TRAPPED BUNDLE"

THE DANGERS OF ACCIDENTALLY DISCLOSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE OFFERS: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS “HANDED A BOOBY-TRAPPED BUNDLE”

June 9, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Civil evidence, Members Content

The judgment of Sir Jonathan Cohen in  Koukash v Koukash [2022] EWHC 1001 (Fam) underlines the importance of keeping without prejudice offers out of the sight of the trial judge.  A finding in a family case was overturned because one…

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL ON "LATE" SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM ISSUE: THE COURT CANNOT BACKDATE DATE OF SEAL ON A CLAIM FORM

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL ON “LATE” SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM ISSUE: THE COURT CANNOT BACKDATE DATE OF SEAL ON A CLAIM FORM

June 6, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Service of the claim form

I am grateful to barrister Henry Bankes-Jones for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal decision today in Walton -v- Pickerings Solicitors and F Brophy [2023] EWCA Civ 602.  Walton v Pickerings final The Court of Appeal allowed…

COST BITES 89: A SUPREME COURT ORDER FOR COSTS CONSTRUED: COSTS WERE (ESSENTIALLY) RESTRICTED TO PAYMENT OF ONE PARTY, TWO SILKS AND ONE JUNIOR

COST BITES 89: A SUPREME COURT ORDER FOR COSTS CONSTRUED: COSTS WERE (ESSENTIALLY) RESTRICTED TO PAYMENT OF ONE PARTY, TWO SILKS AND ONE JUNIOR

June 5, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to  Nicholas Lee Paragon of Costs Solutions for sending me details of the decision in Micula and others v Romania [2023] UKSC 2018/0177 (23 May 2023) where Costs Judge Leonard and Costs Officer Sewell considered the specific…

APPEALS, BUNDLES AND "SPEAKING NOTES": BUNDLES(INCLUDING PAGE NUMBERING) GO AWRY: A "SPEAKING NOTE" IS NOT TO BE USED AS A SUPPLEMENTARY SKELETON ARGUMENT

APPEALS, BUNDLES AND “SPEAKING NOTES”: BUNDLES(INCLUDING PAGE NUMBERING) GO AWRY: A “SPEAKING NOTE” IS NOT TO BE USED AS A SUPPLEMENTARY SKELETON ARGUMENT

May 30, 2023 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Masih & Anor v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 1280 (KB) contains many matters of interest in relation to the conduct of the trial and appeal.   Here we look at two aspects:…

COST BITES 85: JUDGE HAD THE POWER TO MAKE COSTS ORDER WHICH INCLUDED COSTS OF APPLICATIONS AGAINST NON-PARTY

COST BITES 85: JUDGE HAD THE POWER TO MAKE COSTS ORDER WHICH INCLUDED COSTS OF APPLICATIONS AGAINST NON-PARTY

May 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content

In McCarthy v Jones & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 589 the Court of Appeal refused an appeal against a decision that an unsuccessful party pay the costs involved in applications against a non-party.  The trial judge had a discretion to…

COST BITES 84: MEDICAL AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF ITS BILL TO SHOW WHAT THE EXPERT WAS PAID: DECISION ON APPEAL

COST BITES 84: MEDICAL AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF ITS BILL TO SHOW WHAT THE EXPERT WAS PAID: DECISION ON APPEAL

May 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Paul Hughes for providing me with a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust -v- Hoskin, County Court at Manchester22nd May 2023, a copy is available here  HoskinsAppealJudgment. …

THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO STRIKE OUT A PROPERLY PLEADED CLAIM IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: JUDGE'S SHOULD BE ASTUTE TO DEAL WITH APPLICATIONS TO STRIKE OUT WHICH ARE, IN REALITY, APPLICATIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO STRIKE OUT A PROPERLY PLEADED CLAIM IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: JUDGE’S SHOULD BE ASTUTE TO DEAL WITH APPLICATIONS TO STRIKE OUT WHICH ARE, IN REALITY, APPLICATIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

May 24, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, QOCS, Striking out

The judgment of Mr Justice Choudhury in Kasongo v CRBE Ltd & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 557 demonstrates the danger when a defendant makes an application to strike out a statement of case.  The judge allowed an appeal where a…

COST BITES 81: A SUCCESSFUL APPELLANT GETS THEIR COSTS: THE COURT WOULD NOT GIVE A “BLANK CHEQUE IN RELATION TO PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

May 17, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

There are two matters of interest in the Court of Appeal judgment in  R (On the Application Of) v Thanet District Council (Re Costs) [2023] EWCA Civ 526.  Firstly the court’s rejection of an argument that the successful party had…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 96: PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE APPLICATION TO THE FIRST-INSTANCE JUDGE HAS TO BE MADE AT THE INITIAL HEARING (OR ADJOURNMENT THEREOF)

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 96: PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE APPLICATION TO THE FIRST-INSTANCE JUDGE HAS TO BE MADE AT THE INITIAL HEARING (OR ADJOURNMENT THEREOF)

May 16, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of HHJ Pelling in FG Financing Ltd & Anor v Lagun [2023] EWHC 126 (Comm) serves as a useful reminder of the limited period of time available to make an application to the first-instance judge for permission to…

"IT WAS TWENTY YEARS AGO TODAY": A BATCH OF SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASES IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: A CHANCE TO REVIEW (OR REMINISCE..)

“IT WAS TWENTY YEARS AGO TODAY”: A BATCH OF SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM CASES IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: A CHANCE TO REVIEW (OR REMINISCE..)

May 14, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form

The  Court of Appeal judgment in Cranfield & Anor v Bridgegrove Ltd. [2003] EWCA Civ 656 was given 20 years ago today.   One of the aims of that judgment was to clarify issues relating to service of the claim form…

INTEREST ON DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURY CANNOT BE USED AS A MEANS OF PENALISING A DEFENDANT FOR POOR BEHAVIOUR: PART 36 ISSUES ALSO CONSIDERED

INTEREST ON DAMAGES FOR PERSONAL INJURY CANNOT BE USED AS A MEANS OF PENALISING A DEFENDANT FOR POOR BEHAVIOUR: PART 36 ISSUES ALSO CONSIDERED

May 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Interest, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury

The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Smout v Wulfrun Hotels Ltd [2023] EWHC 1128 (KB) considers the question of the use of interest as a penalty for the poor conduct of a defendant.  The judge held that interest should…

AMENDMENT, COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS AND THE DENTON CRITERIA: THERE IS NO HALFWAY HOUSE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

AMENDMENT, COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS AND THE DENTON CRITERIA: THERE IS NO HALFWAY HOUSE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

May 9, 2023 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There are so many judgments dealing with the issue of late amendment that, as I have stated before, I often do not write about them – each being fact specific.  However the Court of Appeal judgment in CNM Estates (Tolworth…

FAILURE TO PAY CORRECT COURT FEE WHEN LODGING PROCEEDINGS AT COURT MEANS ACTION BITES THE DUST: CPR 3.9 AND 3.10 CANNOT HELP

FAILURE TO PAY CORRECT COURT FEE WHEN LODGING PROCEEDINGS AT COURT MEANS ACTION BITES THE DUST: CPR 3.9 AND 3.10 CANNOT HELP

May 5, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Court fees, Members Content

In  Peterson & Anor v Howard De Walden Estates Ltd [2023] EWHC 929 (KB) the unfortunate claimant failed to fail the correct fee. The court declined to issue proceedings.  Consequently the claim was out of time Mr Justice Eyre held…

COST BITES 78: A CASE WHERE A LAWYER WAS CONFINED TO LITIGANT IN PERSON RATES

COST BITES 78: A CASE WHERE A LAWYER WAS CONFINED TO LITIGANT IN PERSON RATES

April 24, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Wilson v Emmott [2023] EWHC 816 (KB) Mr Justice Saini (sitting with Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker as a costs assessor) rejected a lawyer’s appeal against a decision that the lawyer was only entitled to recover costs on the basis…

DEFENDANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE SERVED ONE YEAR LATE: WIDER INTERESTS OF JUSTICE CONSIDERED

DEFENDANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE SERVED ONE YEAR LATE: WIDER INTERESTS OF JUSTICE CONSIDERED

April 5, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Andrew McLaughlin for drawing my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in  Tiernan-Spratt & Anor v City Of Wolverhampton Council [2023] EWHC 811 (KB). It concerns a successful appeal. The judge at first…

INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT... IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT… IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

April 5, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Baker in Holt v Allianz Insurance Plc [2023] EWHC 790 (KB) is another round in a long running battle between car hire companies and insurers.  Whilst the insurer may have lost this round it is…

A LITIGANT CAN "APPEAR" AT A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK HEARING BY THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

A LITIGANT CAN “APPEAR” AT A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK HEARING BY THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

March 27, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Owen v Black Horse Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 325 the Court of Appeal allowed the claimant’s appeal.   The claim had been struck out at the start of a Small Claims Track hearing on the grounds that attendance by the…

PART 36, COSTS: THE JUDGE WAS CORRECT NOT TO FIND THAT PART 36 CONSEQUENCES SHOULD NOT APPLY: A DISPUTE "CONDUCTED IN AN ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE WAY AND AT ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE COST"

PART 36, COSTS: THE JUDGE WAS CORRECT NOT TO FIND THAT PART 36 CONSEQUENCES SHOULD NOT APPLY: A DISPUTE “CONDUCTED IN AN ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE WAY AND AT ENTIRELY DISPROPORTIONATE COST”

March 24, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Lampor & Ors v Jones [2023] EWHC 667 (Ch) Mr Justice Mellor dismissed the appeals by both parties in relation to costs orders made following Part 36 offers. The trial judge had held that the defendant had failed to…

COST BITES 73: APPEAL ON HOURLY RATES DID NOT GO AS THE APPELLANT PLANNED: THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES AND DETAILED ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 73: APPEAL ON HOURLY RATES DID NOT GO AS THE APPELLANT PLANNED: THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES AND DETAILED ASSESSMENT

March 24, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  Harlow District Council v Powerrapid Limited (Rev1) [2023] EWHC 586 (KB) Mr Justice Choudhury, sitting with Costs Judge Rowley as an assessor, rejected an appeal about the hourly rates allowed by the costs judge.  There are important passages about…

CLAIMANT HAD NOT "WON" UNDER PART 36 WHEN SHE HAD NOT BEATEN THE DEFENDANT'S OFFER ON DAMAGES BUT MADE AN OFFER IN RELATION TO LIABILITY: "BAFFLING" ARGUMENTS FAIL TO PREVAIL

CLAIMANT HAD NOT “WON” UNDER PART 36 WHEN SHE HAD NOT BEATEN THE DEFENDANT’S OFFER ON DAMAGES BUT MADE AN OFFER IN RELATION TO LIABILITY: “BAFFLING” ARGUMENTS FAIL TO PREVAIL

February 24, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury

NB THE OBSERVATIONS ABOUT PART 36 WERE DOUBTED AND “OVERRULED” BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Smithstone v Tranmoor Primary School [2026] EWCA Civ 13. SEE THE DISCUSSION IN THE POST ON THE CASE HERE I am grateful to barrister…

A COURT CANNOT IMPOSE CONDITIONS ONCE IT HAS GIVEN UNCONDITIONAL PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE DEADWEIGHT OF THE FINALITY PRINCIPLE PREVAILS

A COURT CANNOT IMPOSE CONDITIONS ONCE IT HAS GIVEN UNCONDITIONAL PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE DEADWEIGHT OF THE FINALITY PRINCIPLE PREVAILS

February 21, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In National Iranian Oil Company v Crescent Petroleum Company International Limited & Anor [2023] EWHC 300 (Comm) Mr Justice Butcher refused an application for permission to appeal to be subject to a condition of payment into court. The court had…

THE JUDGE INTERRUPTED A BIT TOO MUCH... COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT

THE JUDGE INTERRUPTED A BIT TOO MUCH… COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT

February 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content

In Keane v Sargen & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 141 the Court of Appeal commented that interruptions of the cross examination of a witness by the trial judge had not been helpful and, indeed, inappropriate. “I add a few words…

COST BITES 57: ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE COSTS AFTER SETTLEMENT: YOU CAN'T ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU WANT (COURT OF APPEAL VERSION)

COST BITES 57: ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE COSTS AFTER SETTLEMENT: YOU CAN’T ALWAYS GET WHAT YOU WANT (COURT OF APPEAL VERSION)

February 14, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

There have been some interesting decisions recently on issue based costs orders and costs not always following the event. In Tradition Financial Services Ltd v Bilta (UK) Ltd & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 112 the Court of Appeal upheld a…

ANOTHER CASE OF DISCLOSURE OF AN EMBARGOED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: LIABILITY FOR CONTEMPT MAY BE STRICT, BUT IN THIS CASE NEED GO NO FURTHER

ANOTHER CASE OF DISCLOSURE OF AN EMBARGOED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: LIABILITY FOR CONTEMPT MAY BE STRICT, BUT IN THIS CASE NEED GO NO FURTHER

January 30, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content

In Interdigital Technology Corporation & Ors v Lenovo Group Ltd & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 57 the Court of Appeal considered another case where the results a draft embargoed judgment was disclosed (although not the judgment itself).   Liability for the…

← Previous 1 … 6 7 8 … 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

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

Top Posts

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

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.