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 8
"INTERROGATION" OF A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS EXCESSIVE: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

“INTERROGATION” OF A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS EXCESSIVE: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

January 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have seen many cases relating to issues arising following the sending out of draft judgments.  Another example can be viewed in the Court of Appeal judgment today in C & Ors, Re (Care Proceedings: Fact-Finding) [2023] EWCA Civ 38…

COST BITES 51: CASE FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAST TRACK NOT SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

COST BITES 51: CASE FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THE FAST TRACK NOT SMALL CLAIMS TRACK: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

January 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Members Content

In Wilkins v Serco Ltd [2023] EWHC 61 (KB) Mrs Justice Heather Williams rejected the defendant’s appeal in relation to allocation of a case for false imprisonment. She upheld a finding that the case would have been allocated to the…

COSTS REDUCED BY 70% BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT (AFTER BEING REDUCED BY 95% DURING THE ASSESSMENT): CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED

COSTS REDUCED BY 70% BECAUSE OF MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT (AFTER BEING REDUCED BY 95% DURING THE ASSESSMENT): CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED

January 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Murray  in AB v Secretary of State for Justice [2023] EWHC 72 (KB) is part of an extraordinary saga in relation to a costs assessment. Costs had been reduced by 95% on assessment and reduced…

COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY: WHIPLASH TARIFF INJURIES AND COMMON LAW DAMAGES: HOW SHOULD THE COURT DEAL WITH "MIXED" CLAIMS?

COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY: WHIPLASH TARIFF INJURIES AND COMMON LAW DAMAGES: HOW SHOULD THE COURT DEAL WITH “MIXED” CLAIMS?

January 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

In the judgment today in Hassam & Anor v Rabot & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 19 the Court of Appeal (by a majority view) decided that the Civil Liability Act 2018 did not impact on the assessment of damages for…

PROVING THINGS 246: WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE MATCHES NEITHER THE PLEADINGS NOR THE CONTEMPORARY RECORDS

PROVING THINGS 246: WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE MATCHES NEITHER THE PLEADINGS NOR THE CONTEMPORARY RECORDS

January 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

We are looking again at the judgment in Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 from a slightly different stance. The appeal was about QOCS and setting aside a notice of discontinuance. However the process that led…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM

January 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, QOCS

In  Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 the Court of Appeal rejected the defendant’s appeal, which was an attempt to subvert the principles of Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”).  The claimant discontinued the action…

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST EXPERT WITNESS SET ASIDE ON APPEAL: THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT'S CONCLUSIONS CAN BE CRITICISED DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF THEIR DUTY

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST EXPERT WITNESS SET ASIDE ON APPEAL: THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT’S CONCLUSIONS CAN BE CRITICISED DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF THEIR DUTY

January 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Nadia Whittaker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Sweeting in Robinson -v- Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust and Mercier [2023] EWHC 21 (KB), a copy of the judgment is available here. …

COST BITES 44: THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF CONDUCT, ARE PART 36 OFFERS SIGNIFICANT?

COST BITES 44: THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF CONDUCT, ARE PART 36 OFFERS SIGNIFICANT?

January 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We are returning to the judgment of Mrs Justice Stacey in TRX v Southampton Football Club [2022] EWHC 3392 (KB).  The judge made some observations in relation to the costs of the assessment process.  In particular the interplay of CPR 47.20…

COST BITES 43: CLAIMANT'S COSTS INCURRED BEFORE CFA SIGNED WERE RECOVERABLE

COST BITES 43: CLAIMANT’S COSTS INCURRED BEFORE CFA SIGNED WERE RECOVERABLE

January 10, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

In TRX v Southampton Football Club [2022] EWHC 3392 (KB) Mrs Justice Stacey considered a number of issues relating to costs.  One of those was the question of whether pre-CFA costs were recoverable. This required a close consideration of the…

A CLIENT DOES NOT OWE A "DUTY OF GOOD FAITH" TO A SOLICITOR ACTING UNDER A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT

A CLIENT DOES NOT OWE A “DUTY OF GOOD FAITH” TO A SOLICITOR ACTING UNDER A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT

August 10, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Candey Ltd v Bosheh & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1103 Lord Justice Coulson rejected an argument that a client, who has entered into a conditional fee agreement with a solicitor, owed a duty of good faith to that solicitor. …

A SECOND APPEAL IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS, AND DISMISSED FOR THAT REASON

A SECOND APPEAL IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS, AND DISMISSED FOR THAT REASON

August 10, 2022 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Committal proceedings, Members Content

In Nambiar v Solitair Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 1135 the Court of Appeal held that an appeal against a committal order should be struck out as an abuse of process.  Prior to sentencing the appellant had issued an earlier, identical,…

"KAFKAESQUE" PROCEDURAL ISSUE RESOLVED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: A "TANGLE" AND A "MUDDLE"

“KAFKAESQUE” PROCEDURAL ISSUE RESOLVED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: A “TANGLE” AND A “MUDDLE”

August 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Anwer v Central Bridging Loans Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 201 the Court of Appeal resolved procedural issues which it described as a “muddle” and “kafkaesque”.  The issue was a simple one of whether a litigant was entitled to transcripts…

PERSUADING THE JUDGE TO CHANGE THEIR MIND AFTER JUDGMENT CAN BE AN EXPENSIVE STEP: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

PERSUADING THE JUDGE TO CHANGE THEIR MIND AFTER JUDGMENT CAN BE AN EXPENSIVE STEP: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

August 4, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have looked, many times, at issues relating to procedure after the handing down of a draft judgment. The Court of Appeal judgment in George v Cannell & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1067 highlights one of the difficulties that arise. …

THERE IS NO OBLIGATION ON A CLAIMANT TO FILE A REPLY: THE BURDEN OF PROOF REMAINS WITH THE DEFENDANT

THERE IS NO OBLIGATION ON A CLAIMANT TO FILE A REPLY: THE BURDEN OF PROOF REMAINS WITH THE DEFENDANT

August 4, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Pistachios In the Park Ltd & Anor v Sharn Panesar Ltd [2022] EWHC 2088 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman pointed out that the appellant’s argument in relation to pleading and burden of proof ran contrary to the rules.  There is…

CLAIMANT FAILS TO GET AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: IN A CASE WHERE THE COURT HAD LOST THE FILE AND NOT SENT OUT A SEALED CLAIM FORM WITHIN THE FOUR MONTH PERIOD

CLAIMANT FAILS TO GET AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: IN A CASE WHERE THE COURT HAD LOST THE FILE AND NOT SENT OUT A SEALED CLAIM FORM WITHIN THE FOUR MONTH PERIOD

August 3, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Service of the claim form

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL. SEE THE BLOG POST ABOUT THE APPEAL DECISION HERE. The judgment of Robin Vos (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) in Walton v Pickerings Solicitors & Anor…

COST BITES 12: A DEFENDANT WHO IS NOT A PARTY TO AN APPEAL CAN STILL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF THAT APPEAL

COST BITES 12: A DEFENDANT WHO IS NOT A PARTY TO AN APPEAL CAN STILL BE ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF THAT APPEAL

July 29, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Turner & Ors v Thomas & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1944 (Ch) Mr Justice Zacaroli considered the appropriate principles to be applied as to costs when a defendant was not a party to an appeal made by a co-defendant….

THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION TO SERVE A CLAIM FORM: "CLEAR WATER" BETWEEN THE TWO TESTS: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS ORDER SETTING ASIDE A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR SERVICE

THE IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION TO SERVE A CLAIM FORM: “CLEAR WATER” BETWEEN THE TWO TESTS: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS ORDER SETTING ASIDE A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR SERVICE

July 27, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form

In ST v BAI (SA) Trading As Brittany Ferries [2022] EWCA Civ 1037  the Court of Appeal overturned a decision, itself made on appeal, where a prospective application to extend time for service of the claim form was set aside….

COST BITES 10:  COURT OF APPEAL UNHAPPY AT £730,000 BILL FOR ONE DAY APPEAL: HOURLY RATES ABOVE GUIDELINES HAVE TO BE JUSTIFIED, COUNSEL'S FEES MUST BE REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONATE

COST BITES 10: COURT OF APPEAL UNHAPPY AT £730,000 BILL FOR ONE DAY APPEAL: HOURLY RATES ABOVE GUIDELINES HAVE TO BE JUSTIFIED, COUNSEL’S FEES MUST BE REASONABLE AND PROPORTIONATE

July 26, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  Athena Capital Fund SICAV-FIS SCA & Ors v Secretariat of State for the Holy See (Costs) [2022] EWCA Civ 1061 the Court of Appeal were concerned about the level of costs being claimed in a one day appeal.  The…

COST BITES 9: FARES FAIR: IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS YOU CAN HAVE A "SCORE DRAW" AND EACH SIDE GETS NO COSTS

COST BITES 9: FARES FAIR: IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS YOU CAN HAVE A “SCORE DRAW” AND EACH SIDE GETS NO COSTS

July 25, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  United Trade Action Group Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Transport for London & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1026 the Court of  Appeal upheld a decision that there be no order for costs between the parties in judicial…

CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST WHEN GIVING EVIDENCE ABOUT A BICYCLE

CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST WHEN GIVING EVIDENCE ABOUT A BICYCLE

July 21, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

My attention has recently been drawn to the judgment of HHJ Ralton in Darnley -v- Cornish 2021 WL 04760420.  The judge, on appeal, overturned a finding that a claimant, who had misled the court as to ownership of a bicycle…

COURT OF APPEAL REJECTS INGENIOUS ARGUMENT THAT PERMISSION GROUNDS SHOULD BE RE-OPENED - AFTER THE APPEAL

COURT OF APPEAL REJECTS INGENIOUS ARGUMENT THAT PERMISSION GROUNDS SHOULD BE RE-OPENED – AFTER THE APPEAL

July 21, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

I have written more about applications for permission to appeal in the past few weeks than in the previous nine years.   The Court of Appeal judgment in  Ingenious Games LLP & Ors v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs…

APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL WAS MADE OUT OF TIME: THE TRIAL JUDGE HAD NO JURISDICTION TO HEAR THE APPLICATION

APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL WAS MADE OUT OF TIME: THE TRIAL JUDGE HAD NO JURISDICTION TO HEAR THE APPLICATION

July 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content

There is another aspect of the judgment in Omya UK Ltd v Andrews Excavations Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1882 (TCC) that is worth considering. The unsuccessful defendants applied for permission to appeal to the trial judge at the hearing…

A DEFENDANT WHO DOES NOT ATTEND TRIAL CANNOT SIMPLY TURN THE CLOCK BACK: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPLICATION UNDER CPR 39.3

July 13, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Mabrouk v Murray [2022] EWCA Civ 960 the Court of Appeal refused the defendant’s application for permission to appeal in a case where the defendant failed to attend the trial.   The Court of Appeal dismissed the application under CPR…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION TO STRIKE OUT “UNMANAGEABLE” COURT PROCEEDINGS

July 11, 2022 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Case Management, Members Content

In Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group (UK) Ltd & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 951 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision to strike out a claim.    The Court doubted whether an action could ever be described…

RESPONDENTS TO AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: YOU SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY WRITTEN A LETTER AND SAVED YOURSELVES £67,000

RESPONDENTS TO AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: YOU SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY WRITTEN A LETTER AND SAVED YOURSELVES £67,000

July 8, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

In over three decades of writing about civil procedure I cannot recall any cases about costs following a permission to appeal hearing. There are now two cases this week.  In Kerseviciene v Quadri & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1757 (QB)…

FIXED COSTS OUSTED WHEN THE PARTIES AGREE COSTS ARE TO BE THE SUBJECT OF A DETAILED ASSESSMENT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

FIXED COSTS OUSTED WHEN THE PARTIES AGREE COSTS ARE TO BE THE SUBJECT OF A DETAILED ASSESSMENT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

July 8, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

In the judgment today in Doyle -v- M&D Foundations & Building Services Limited [2022] EWCA CIV 927 the Court of Appeal found that it was possible for parties to contract out of the fixed costs provisions of the protocols. THE…

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF OVER SERVICE OF AN UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: DEFENDANT,HOWEVER, SAVED BY CPR 3.10.

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF OVER SERVICE OF AN UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: DEFENDANT,HOWEVER, SAVED BY CPR 3.10.

June 27, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Service of the claim form

In Pitalia & Anor v NHS Commissioning Board [2022] EWHC 1636_2 (QB) His Honour Judge Pearce dismissed a claimant’s appeal in a case where the claim form had not been validly served.  The defendant had made an error in that…

SIMMONS -V- CASTLE 10% UPLIFT APPLIES TO DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF REPAIRING COVENTANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

SIMMONS -V- CASTLE 10% UPLIFT APPLIES TO DAMAGES FOR BREACH OF REPAIRING COVENTANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

June 21, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content

In Khan v Mehmood [2022] EWCA Civ 791 the Court of Appeal held that the 10% uplift in s.44(6) of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 applied to damages for breach of a repairing covenant. “……

"SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE" AND FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WE'LL KNOW IT WHEN WE SEE IT BUT WE DON'T SEE IT HERE: JUDGE'S DECISION NOT TO IMPOSE USUAL PENALTIES OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

“SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE” AND FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WE’LL KNOW IT WHEN WE SEE IT BUT WE DON’T SEE IT HERE: JUDGE’S DECISION NOT TO IMPOSE USUAL PENALTIES OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

June 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury, Uncategorized

In Woodger v Hallas [2022] EWHC 1561 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles overturned a decision of the Circuit Judge that the usual principles of a finding of fundamental dishonesty should not apply to the claimant.  The judgment involves a consideration…

APPEALS: POINTS OF LAW AND BUNDLES: LITIGANTS SHOWN THE YELLOW CARD: YOU CAN READ THE RULES HERE

APPEALS: POINTS OF LAW AND BUNDLES: LITIGANTS SHOWN THE YELLOW CARD: YOU CAN READ THE RULES HERE

June 16, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Members Content, Written advocacy

In  Banks v Blount [2022] EWHC 1491 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie was critical of an appellant for failing to comply with two basic elements of the practice directions relating to appeals.  The need for clarity and precision when referring to…

AN AGREEMENT TO PAY COSTS WAS TO PAY FIXED COSTS ONLY:NOT DISPLACED BY LATER "PART 36" OFFER:  DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL

AN AGREEMENT TO PAY COSTS WAS TO PAY FIXED COSTS ONLY:NOT DISPLACED BY LATER “PART 36” OFFER: DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL

June 8, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Luba QC, sitting with Costs Judge Rowley, in Soares -v- Wilson (27th May 2022). A copy of which is available Soares v Wilson…

AN INSURANCE PREMIUM WAS PROPERLY INCURRED: JUDGE, ON APPEAL, ALLOWS ATE COSTS TO BE DEDUCTED FROM CHILD’S DAMAGES

May 31, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Express Solicitors for sending me a copy of a judgment of X -v- H&M Hennes, made by HHJ Lethem on 21st April 2022. It relates to the recoverability of an insurance premium between solicitor and client. …

"THE LADD -V- MARSHALL CRITERIA ARE CUMULATIVE": RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED BUT APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE REFUSED: APPEAL ON JUDGE'S FINDINGS OF FACT FAILED

“THE LADD -V- MARSHALL CRITERIA ARE CUMULATIVE”: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED BUT APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE REFUSED: APPEAL ON JUDGE’S FINDINGS OF FACT FAILED

May 23, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Premier Experts London Ltd -v- Rajwani [2022] EWHC 1188 (QB) Sir Andrew Nicol refused the defendant’s application for permission to appeal.  Relief was granted when new evidence was served late, however that evidence failed to satisfy the Ladd -v-…

PAYING PARTY REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON LATE POINTS OF DISPUTE IN ASSESSMENT: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

PAYING PARTY REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON LATE POINTS OF DISPUTE IN ASSESSMENT: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

May 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Celtic Bioenergy Ltd v Knowles Ltd [2022] EWHC 1223 (QB) Mrs Justice Foster refused the defendant’s appeal in a case where a very late addition to the points of dispute had been refused by Master Campbell.  The issues that…

PROVING THINGS 232: "THE RULES OF THE GAME OF ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL HAVE NOT BEEN DRAFTED WITH CIVIL LIABILITY IN MIND": APPEAL LEADS TO OVERTURNING OF JUDGMENT ON FOOTBALLER'S NEGLIGENCE: A REMATCH IS ORDERED

PROVING THINGS 232: “THE RULES OF THE GAME OF ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL HAVE NOT BEEN DRAFTED WITH CIVIL LIABILITY IN MIND”: APPEAL LEADS TO OVERTURNING OF JUDGMENT ON FOOTBALLER’S NEGLIGENCE: A REMATCH IS ORDERED

May 18, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Fulham Football Club v Jones [2022] EWHC 1108 (QB) Mr Justice Lane allowed an appeal in a case where a footballer had found to be negligent when tackling an opponent.  The judgment considers the issue of liability in the…

HOW COSTS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THE WORLD WAS YOUNG: SOLICITOR'S APPEAL AGAINST A REFUSAL TO ORDER A STAY AND SECURITY FOR COSTS DISMISSED: APPEAL FOR AN ORDER THAT SOLICITORS REPLY TO PART 18 QUESTIONS ALLOWED

HOW COSTS HAVE CHANGED SINCE THE WORLD WAS YOUNG: SOLICITOR’S APPEAL AGAINST A REFUSAL TO ORDER A STAY AND SECURITY FOR COSTS DISMISSED: APPEAL FOR AN ORDER THAT SOLICITORS REPLY TO PART 18 QUESTIONS ALLOWED

May 11, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In the judgment today in Edwards (& others) -v- Slater and Gordon UK Limited [2022] EWHC 1091 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie disallowed the defendant’s appeal in relation to issues relating to disclosure, funding and security for costs.  He allowed the…

PROVING THINGS 230: NEGLIGENCE AND BREACH MUST STILL BE PROVEN WHEN BRINGING CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS

May 10, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Professional negligence,

In  Percy v White & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 493 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision based on a contribution notice. This case makes it clear that a party bringing contribution proceedings still has to establish breach and causation…

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER STRIKING OUT AN ACTION: A CASE WITH "A NUMBER OF EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES", NOT LEAST THAT THE DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE WAS UNRELIABLE

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER STRIKING OUT AN ACTION: A CASE WITH “A NUMBER OF EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES”, NOT LEAST THAT THE DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE WAS UNRELIABLE

May 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In  Storey v British Telecommunications Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 616 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order striking out an personal injury action.  The court was fairly critical about the evidence that had been placed before it…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: NOT ALL BAD REASONS FOR DEFAULT ARE EQUALLY BAD: A PARTY CANNOT ASSERT PREJUDICE BY BEING SILENT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: NOT ALL BAD REASONS FOR DEFAULT ARE EQUALLY BAD: A PARTY CANNOT ASSERT PREJUDICE BY BEING SILENT

May 3, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In EXN v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust & Anor [2022] EWHC 872 (QB) Mr Justice Turner allowed an appeal where a District Judge had refused to grant relief from sanctions.  The judgment is particularly interesting in that it notes…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN A PARTY HAD NOT MADE A FORMAL APPLICATION

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN A PARTY HAD NOT MADE A FORMAL APPLICATION

May 3, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Park v Hadi & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 581 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision granting a claimant relief from sanctions. The initial application had been made informally, during the course of an application, the defendant’s appeal against…

EXCESSIVE COSTS INCURRED IN ARGUING ABOUT COSTS: A PARTY OBTAINING RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WAS CORRECTLY ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE APPLICATION: "RULES EXIST FOR A REASON"

EXCESSIVE COSTS INCURRED IN ARGUING ABOUT COSTS: A PARTY OBTAINING RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WAS CORRECTLY ORDERED TO PAY THE COSTS OF THE APPLICATION: “RULES EXIST FOR A REASON”

April 14, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

In  Swivel UK Ltd v Tecnolumen GmbH & Anor [2022] EWHC 825 (Ch) Mr Justice Marcus Smith upheld the decision of a Master that a party that had obtained relief from sanctions should pay the costs of the application.  It…

APPEALING FACTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: "ISLAND HOPPING" IS HARD TO DO

APPEALING FACTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: “ISLAND HOPPING” IS HARD TO DO

April 6, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content

In Volpi & Anor v Volpi [2022] EWCA Civ 464 the Court of Appeal highlighted the difficulties an appellant faces when seeking to appeal findings of fact.  Such appeals are not always unsuccessful, however the appellant faces a very difficult…

LEADING COUNSEL MAY HAVE BEEN IN CONTEMPT OF COURT: "LAWYERS INVOLVED IN CASES OF THIS KIND HAVE A PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO INFORM THEMSELVES ABOUT THE RULES AND ABIDE BY THEM"

LEADING COUNSEL MAY HAVE BEEN IN CONTEMPT OF COURT: “LAWYERS INVOLVED IN CASES OF THIS KIND HAVE A PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY TO INFORM THEMSELVES ABOUT THE RULES AND ABIDE BY THEM”

April 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There has been a number of judgments recently concerning the disclosure of embargoed judgments. The Court of Appeal decision in   Griffiths  v Tickle & Ors (Re Disclosure by Counsel for Appellant and Application by First Respondent)  [2022] EWCA Civ 465…

IF YOU WANT HOURLY RATES HIGHER THAN THE GUIDELINE FIGURES YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE "A CLEAR AND COMPELLING JUSTIFICATION": COURT OF APPEAL DECISION  TODAY

IF YOU WANT HOURLY RATES HIGHER THAN THE GUIDELINE FIGURES YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE “A CLEAR AND COMPELLING JUSTIFICATION”: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

April 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In  Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd & Ors v LG Display Co. Ltd & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWCA Civ 466 the Court of Appeal sent out a clear message that if a party wants hourly rates outside the guideline rates then…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION SETTING ASIDE AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: CASE ON HEAD OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT GOES BUST

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION SETTING ASIDE AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: CASE ON HEAD OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT GOES BUST

March 30, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In  Qatar Investment and Project Development Holding Company & Anor v Phoenix Ancient Art SA (Rev1) [2022] EWCA Civ 422 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision setting aside an order granting an extension of time for service of the…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS AN ORDER THAT NO COSTS BE ORDERED ON AN APPEAL

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS AN ORDER THAT NO COSTS BE ORDERED ON AN APPEAL

March 30, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In South Lodge Flats Limited v Malik [2022] EWCA Civ 411 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that no order for costs be made on an appeal.  The defendants had succeeded in the appeal but required the indulgence of…

COURT OF APPEAL DISMISSES APPEAL WHEN CLAIM FORM SERVED ONE DAY LATE: "RELIANCE ON NON-COMPLIANT SERVICE IS NOT ONE OF THE INSTANCES OF OPPORTUNISM DEPRECATED BY THE COURTS"

COURT OF APPEAL DISMISSES APPEAL WHEN CLAIM FORM SERVED ONE DAY LATE: “RELIANCE ON NON-COMPLIANT SERVICE IS NOT ONE OF THE INSTANCES OF OPPORTUNISM DEPRECATED BY THE COURTS”

March 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form

In The Good Law Project, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for Health And Social Care [2022] EWCA Civ 35 the Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant’s appeal against a a decision not granting any relief…

PROVING THINGS 227: FAILURE TO PROVE A DEBT CLAIM: "THE PROOF REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO THE SUMS WHICH IT CLAIMS IS SADLY LACKING"

PROVING THINGS 227: FAILURE TO PROVE A DEBT CLAIM: “THE PROOF REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO THE SUMS WHICH IT CLAIMS IS SADLY LACKING”

March 23, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Emery Planning Partnership Ltd v Bevan [2022] EWHC 494 (QB) illustrates a failure by a claimant to prove a debt claim.  It is (yet another) object lesson that facts and evidence are needed…

ANOTHER CASE OF A JUDGMENT EMBARGO BEING BREACHED: ALL RECIPIENTS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE AND BREADTH OF THE EMBARGO ON DRAFT JUDGMENTS

ANOTHER CASE OF A JUDGMENT EMBARGO BEING BREACHED: ALL RECIPIENTS NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE AND BREADTH OF THE EMBARGO ON DRAFT JUDGMENTS

March 23, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

In The Public Institution for Social Security v Banque Pictet & Cie SA & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 368 the Court of Appeal considered yet another case of breach of an embargoed judgment. There was clearly a breach (somewhere) which…

SOLICITORS, AIRLINES AND LIENS: SUPREME COURT DECISION

SOLICITORS, AIRLINES AND LIENS: SUPREME COURT DECISION

March 16, 2022 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Members Content

In Bott & Co Solicitors Ltd v Ryanair DAC [2022] UKSC 8 the Supreme Court allowed an appeal from the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal had held that the solicitors were not providing a litigation service in the…

← Previous 1 … 7 8 9 … 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.