Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. Hardwicke, London
Browse: Home » Applications
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING

December 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Striking out

The Denton principles were considered in an unusual context by Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Oliver v Shaikh [2019] EWHC 3389 (QB).   THE CASE The claimant is a Circuit Judge. He brought an action for harassment against the defendant….

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 73: THE AUTOMATIC STAY

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 73: THE AUTOMATIC STAY

December 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure

CPR 15,11(2) provides for an automatic stay if nothing happens in an action for six months after service.  This is a rule that can be overlooked.   THE RULE CPR rule 15.11. Sub-paragraph (1) of that rule provides that: “Where…

WHY FAILING IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION CAN BE EXPENSIVE: (£1,015,722 - EXPENSIVE)

WHY FAILING IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION CAN BE EXPENSIVE: (£1,015,722 – EXPENSIVE)

November 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs

In BTI 2014 LLC v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Anor [2019] EWHC 3219 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt considered the appropriate order for costs when a defendant failed in an application for summary judgment.  The defendants were ordered to pay the costs…

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE'S DECISION

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE’S DECISION

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence

In  L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor v Liqwd Inc & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1943  the Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s decision not to admit new evidence that a defendant attempted to introduce after judgment was handed down….

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN'T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN’T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

November 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Witness statements

The danger of witness statements from solicitors purporting to give evidence as to fact has been emphasised many times in the cases reported on the blog.   The danger can be seen again in the judgment of Ms Pat Treacy (sitting…

A CRI DE COEUR FOR MORE MONEY WON'T GET YOU AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: MASTER EMPHASISES THE NEED FOR HARD EVIDENCE

A CRI DE COEUR FOR MORE MONEY WON’T GET YOU AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: MASTER EMPHASISES THE NEED FOR HARD EVIDENCE

October 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Interim Payments

In RXK v Hampshire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2751 (QB) Master Cook made some important observations about the quality of evidence needed to obtain an interim order for costs in an ongoing case. (The judgment in X -v-…

THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

October 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Experts, Limitation, QOCS, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

  The “Back to Basics” series, as the title suggests, deals with some of the basic elements of civil procedure. It covers everything from applications and bundles to the taking of witness statements.  The titles are often prompted by elements…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD...

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD…

October 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts

One, unusual, aspect of the decision in Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) is that the experts had sought directions from the court. This brings attention to the (apparently) little used provisions of CPR 35.14.  Experts have the…

DISTRICT JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE "PARTIALLY" RECUSED THEMSELVES: THINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A VERY INTERESTING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS...

DISTRICT JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE “PARTIALLY” RECUSED THEMSELVES: THINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A VERY INTERESTING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS…

October 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Witness statements

I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for providing me a copy of the judgment in Akers -v- Kirlkland [2019] EWHC 2176 (QB) Mr Justice Waksman discussed, in detail, the circumstances in which a judge should recuse themselves and…

REALISTIC TIME ESTIMATES: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THIS RIGHT

REALISTIC TIME ESTIMATES: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THIS RIGHT

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Written advocacy

There is a short passage in  Barrowfen Properties Ltd v Hambros Investments Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 2548 (Ch) where Chief Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Briggs makes it clear that an application had been given an inadequate time estimate….

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT'S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT’S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Witness statements

This series looks at the question of when, if ever, it is appropriate for a solicitor to swear an affidavit or make a statement in place of the client? This issue was considered by Stanley Burnton J in Bracken Partners…

STOP ARGUING WITH THE JUDGE AFTER JUDGMENT IS GIVEN: POST-JUDGMENT SUBMISSIONS LEADS TO CASE GOING OFF THE RAILS

STOP ARGUING WITH THE JUDGE AFTER JUDGMENT IS GIVEN: POST-JUDGMENT SUBMISSIONS LEADS TO CASE GOING OFF THE RAILS

September 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence

The judgment today in AR & ML [2019] EWFC 56 is of considerable importance to all those who seek to “re-argue” a case after judgment rather than appeal.  Mostyn J attempts to put an end to what he identified as…

SERVE YOUR EVIDENCE IN RESPONSE VERY LATE IN THE DAY - WHAT IS THE COURT GOING TO THINK?

SERVE YOUR EVIDENCE IN RESPONSE VERY LATE IN THE DAY – WHAT IS THE COURT GOING TO THINK?

September 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure

In Gregory & Anor v Moore & Ors [2019] EWHC 2430 (Ch)  Chief Master Marsh commented upon evidence served in response, but very late in the day.   In the absence of an explanation in relation to late service the Master…

WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM

WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM

September 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time

The decision in Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1504 related to a case where a decision was made when the judge was not given relevant papers that had arrived at court. “In…

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

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…

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: DEFENDANT'S SOLICITOR FAILED TO NOTICE THAT PARTICULARS OF CLAIM HAD BEEN SERVED WITH THE CLAIM FORM

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: DEFENDANT’S SOLICITOR FAILED TO NOTICE THAT PARTICULARS OF CLAIM HAD BEEN SERVED WITH THE CLAIM FORM

September 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

The judgment of HH Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a HIgh Court Judge)  in Praetura Asset Finance Ltd v Hood [2019] EWHC 2231 (Comm) shows how important it is to check what has been served.  The one, overwhelming, lesson for…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 60: INTERIM ORDERS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: "CASH FLOW IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF BUSINESS"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 60: INTERIM ORDERS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: “CASH FLOW IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF BUSINESS”

September 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting

Here we look at the rules relating to interim orders on account of costs, a subject of considerable importance in relation to practitioner’s cash flow and client’s pockets.  CPR 44.2(8) “(8) Where the court orders a party to pay costs…

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR PARTIES TO ARRIVE AT COURT: APPEAL AGAINST ORDER UNDER CPR 39.3 ALLOWED

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR PARTIES TO ARRIVE AT COURT: APPEAL AGAINST ORDER UNDER CPR 39.3 ALLOWED

September 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure

In  Akita & Anor v Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland [2019] EWHC 1712 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer held that a trial judge, knowing that parties were on the way to court, should have waited longer before…

WHY IT IS IMPORTANT LITIGATORS KNOW HOW TO COMPUTE TIME PROPERLY:  7 DAYS MEANS 7 DAYS: APPLICATION TWO DAYS LATE: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

WHY IT IS IMPORTANT LITIGATORS KNOW HOW TO COMPUTE TIME PROPERLY: 7 DAYS MEANS 7 DAYS: APPLICATION TWO DAYS LATE: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

August 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Extensions of time

In Evans v Pinsent Masons LLP [2019] EWHC 2150 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer overturned a decision granting relief from sanctions. A major issue arose out of confusion by the claimant’s solicitors over the calculation of the time period. This…

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, 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…

1 2 … 12 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2019. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 18,051 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 8: SURVIVING CHRISTMAS
  • APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE
  • CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE
  • RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING
  • 2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (6): WHY WE STILL FRET OVER EXPERTS …

Top Posts & Pages

  • STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 8: SURVIVING CHRISTMAS
  • APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT'S UPHILL STRUGGLE
  • CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE
  • RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING
  • THE LEGAL CHRISTMAS MUSIC CONTEST 2019: A RUNNING ACCOUNT OF THE CONTESTANTS

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies.
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2019 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin