Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Applications » Page 10
EXPERT WATCH 26: JUDGE'S DECISION NOT TO ADMIT EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: "IT IS NOT CLEAR TO ME WHAT VALUE IT WOULD ADD TO THE CASE"

EXPERT WATCH 26: JUDGE’S DECISION NOT TO ADMIT EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: “IT IS NOT CLEAR TO ME WHAT VALUE IT WOULD ADD TO THE CASE”

November 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

It is rare to see an appeal where a decision about whether to admit expert evidence is considered.  In this case the Court of Appeal considered the judge’s decision not to admit a report. Both parties agreed that the report…

COST BITES 312: A CHANCE TO SEE COSTS BUDGETING IN ACTION: A CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED AND THE CLAIMANT IS A PROTECTED PARTY

COST BITES 312: A CHANCE TO SEE COSTS BUDGETING IN ACTION: A CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED AND THE CLAIMANT IS A PROTECTED PARTY

November 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

It is always interesting to read  detailed decisions about costs budgeting.  They are few and far between. We have a full judgment here where the Master deals with issues such as hourly rates, the impact of allegations of dishonesty and…

AIRLINE'S ATTEMPT TO "CHALLENGE JURISDICTION" FAILS TO TAKE OFF: "I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE DEFENDANT HAS DEFENDED THIS ACTION IN THE MANNER IN WHICH IT HAS"

AIRLINE’S ATTEMPT TO “CHALLENGE JURISDICTION” FAILS TO TAKE OFF: “I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHY THE DEFENDANT HAS DEFENDED THIS ACTION IN THE MANNER IN WHICH IT HAS”

November 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There are some interesting applications where defendants attempt to challenge the jurisdiction of the Court using CPR 11. This case is one of the most intriguing I have seen.  The defendant’s argument here relied on the submission that notification of…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 40: THE CLAIMANT'S CASE ON CAUSATION WAS NOT PLEADED: THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT RELY ON MATTERS SET OUT IN CORRESPONDENCE AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO A PLEADED CASE

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 40: THE CLAIMANT’S CASE ON CAUSATION WAS NOT PLEADED: THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT RELY ON MATTERS SET OUT IN CORRESPONDENCE AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO A PLEADED CASE

November 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

This case has plenty of pleading issues, in particular in relation to a failure to plead causation and damages.  This is one of many cases we have seen this year where claimants have failed to plead a case on causation….

SERVICE POINTS 24: THE DEFENDANTS' FAILURE TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION TIMEOUSLY MEANT THAT IT HAD WAIVED ISSUES RELATING TO SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM

SERVICE POINTS 24: THE DEFENDANTS’ FAILURE TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION TIMEOUSLY MEANT THAT IT HAD WAIVED ISSUES RELATING TO SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM

November 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

One of the the issues that has arisen several times this year relates to whether there is an obligation on a defendant, who wishes to dispute the issue of service,  to make an application under CPR Part 11.   This is…

INTEREST ON PART 36 OFFERS: HOW SHOULD IT BE CALCULATED? GIVING THE CLAIMANT INTEREST ON COSTS BEFORE THEY WERE ACTUALLY INCURRED IS NOT AN ABSURDITY

INTEREST ON PART 36 OFFERS: HOW SHOULD IT BE CALCULATED? GIVING THE CLAIMANT INTEREST ON COSTS BEFORE THEY WERE ACTUALLY INCURRED IS NOT AN ABSURDITY

November 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interest, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury

This is an interesting Part 36 issue in a case where the claimant had beaten its own Part 36 offer.  The court made an order for additional interest from the date of expiry of the offer.  Does the defendant have…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 38: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM IN A £3,000,000 CLAIM STRUCK OUT:  THE COURT USES A "CARROT AND STICK" APPROACH TO DEFECTIVE PLEADINGS

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 38: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM IN A £3,000,000 CLAIM STRUCK OUT: THE COURT USES A “CARROT AND STICK” APPROACH TO DEFECTIVE PLEADINGS

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In this case the judge decided that the claimant’s pleaded case was so defective that the entire Particulars of Claim needed to be struck out.  It is a working example of how pleadings need to be compliant and cannot be…

ANOTHER FALSE  AND "HALLUCINATED" CITATION CASE: A SOLICITOR IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WORK DONE BY THEIR STAFF: WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE

ANOTHER FALSE AND “HALLUCINATED” CITATION CASE: A SOLICITOR IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WORK DONE BY THEIR STAFF: WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Wasted Costs

We have yet another case of “hallucinated” cases caused by artificial “intelligence” being cited in court.  These have the capacity to, and indeed do, land lawyers in very hot water.  Here false cases were put before the court in an…

SERVICE POINTS 23: THE COURT REFUSES TO RATIFY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM BY EMAIL: "THE RESULTS ARE HARSH BUT THAT IS A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE OF THE REGIME..."

SERVICE POINTS 23: THE COURT REFUSES TO RATIFY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM BY EMAIL: “THE RESULTS ARE HARSH BUT THAT IS A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE OF THE REGIME…”

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

We could, perhaps, run some kind of charity betting game on whether, and how many, cases there will be on service of the claim form between now and Christmas. The reason for not doing so it because it runs the…

MAZUR MATTERS 39: CILEX APPLIES TO APPEAL MAZUR DECISION

MAZUR MATTERS 39: CILEX APPLIES TO APPEAL MAZUR DECISION

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

An announcement on the CILEX website today states that it is applying for permission to appeal the decision in Mazur.   The argument will be that, the Law Society, The SRA and the High Court construed the Solicitors Act incorrectly. Watch…

SERVICE POINTS 22: AN APPLICATION WAS PROPERLY SERVED WHEN IT WAS SENT BY FIRST CLASS "SIGNED FOR SERVICE": THE FACT THAT THE RECIPIENT DID NOT COLLECT IT IS NOT RELEVANT

SERVICE POINTS 22: AN APPLICATION WAS PROPERLY SERVED WHEN IT WAS SENT BY FIRST CLASS “SIGNED FOR SERVICE”: THE FACT THAT THE RECIPIENT DID NOT COLLECT IT IS NOT RELEVANT

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents

Here we look at a particular point in relation to the service of an application. The application had been sent by first class “signed for” service at an address given for service by the respondents. The respondents did not receive…

COST BITES 309: ISSUES OF SECURITY FOR COSTS CONSIDERED IN A SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT : WITH IMPORTANT POINTERS HERE FOR ALL SECURITY FOR COSTS APPLICATIONS: "I AM NOT PREPARED TO DECIDE THIS APPLICATION ON THE BASIS OF INFERENCE AND CONJECTURE")

COST BITES 309: ISSUES OF SECURITY FOR COSTS CONSIDERED IN A SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT : WITH IMPORTANT POINTERS HERE FOR ALL SECURITY FOR COSTS APPLICATIONS: “I AM NOT PREPARED TO DECIDE THIS APPLICATION ON THE BASIS OF INFERENCE AND CONJECTURE”)

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are looking at an application relating to security for costs in the context of a solicitor and own client assessment. However, as the heading indicates, there are more general lesson here for all litigators.  In particular the need to…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 37: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM STRUCK OUT: THEY "FAIL TO FULFIL ANY OF THE REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED FOR, AND PURPOSES TO BE SERVED BY, PARTICULARS OF CLAIM"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 37: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM STRUCK OUT: THEY “FAIL TO FULFIL ANY OF THE REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED FOR, AND PURPOSES TO BE SERVED BY, PARTICULARS OF CLAIM”

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In this case the claimants claimed £292,806,729,326,976,872,097,543,994.24,(or alternatively £377,594,620,661.41.).  However the court held that their pleaded case did not comply with the rules, and it was not possible for the defendants to know the case they had to meet.  The…

SERVICE POINTS 21: VERY STRICT REQUIREMENTS APPLY IF YOU WANT TO AGREE AN EXTENSION OF TIME: THEY HAVE TO BE IN WRITING AND THEY HAVE TO BE TOTALLY CLEAR AS TO DATES...

SERVICE POINTS 21: VERY STRICT REQUIREMENTS APPLY IF YOU WANT TO AGREE AN EXTENSION OF TIME: THEY HAVE TO BE IN WRITING AND THEY HAVE TO BE TOTALLY CLEAR AS TO DATES…

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content

We are looking at the same case again here, but from a slightly different angle. This relates to written agreements to vary court orders.  Firstly the agreements have to be in writing; secondly they have to be totally clear as…

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are returning again to the case where the claimants arranged the taping of meetings with the defendants’ solicitors.  The judge was sceptical of the claimants’ assertions that they were not fully aware of the methods being used. (This case…

SERVICE POINTS 20: ANOTHER ACTION FAILS BECAUSE OF NON-SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A REMINDER THAT CPR 7(6) IS VERY STRICT: THE COURT WOULD NOT IMPLY AN AGREEMENT FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE TIME FOR SERVICE

SERVICE POINTS 20: ANOTHER ACTION FAILS BECAUSE OF NON-SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A REMINDER THAT CPR 7(6) IS VERY STRICT: THE COURT WOULD NOT IMPLY AN AGREEMENT FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE TIME FOR SERVICE

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The sheer number of cases on mis-service of the claim form this year indicate that, in all litigator’s offices, there should be large signs that state “serve the claim form properly and on time”.  Today we are looking at another…

PERMISSION TO APPEAL "SOME OTHER COMPELLING REASON" AND A FRIENDLY STATE

PERMISSION TO APPEAL “SOME OTHER COMPELLING REASON” AND A FRIENDLY STATE

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

CPR 52.6(1)(b) states that a court can give permission to appeal where ” there is some other compelling reason for the appeal to be heard”. That rule is rarely considered.  However we a direct consideration of that that rule in…

SERVICE POINTS 19: THE DEFENDANT WAS ALLOWED TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION DESPITE NOT USING PART 11 (AND, PERHAPS, A WORKING EXAMPLE OF WHY LITIGATORS NEED TO READ THIS BLOG...)

SERVICE POINTS 19: THE DEFENDANT WAS ALLOWED TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION DESPITE NOT USING PART 11 (AND, PERHAPS, A WORKING EXAMPLE OF WHY LITIGATORS NEED TO READ THIS BLOG…)

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are looking at another claim form case. This time the issue related to whether the defendant had made the correct application and, if it had not, whether it was prevented from arguing the court did not have jurisdiction.  What…

THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITOR HAS BEEN "SET UP", SECRETLY RECORDED AND TOLD US THINGS HE SHOULD NOT: NOW WE WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THOSE RECORDINGS: QUITE A CASE THIS...

THE DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITOR HAS BEEN “SET UP”, SECRETLY RECORDED AND TOLD US THINGS HE SHOULD NOT: NOW WE WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THOSE RECORDINGS: QUITE A CASE THIS…

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Summary judgment, Witness statements

Here we have an extraordinary case.  The claimants’ employed a private enquiry agent to meet, on a pretence, with the defendants’ solicitor.  That meeting was used by the enquiry agent to obtain information about the defendants’ case. It was videoed…

COST BITES 308: SHOULD BUDGETING TAKE PLACE IN A £340 MILLION CASE? TAXIS DRIVERS WANT TO KNOW THE FARE IN ADVANCE

COST BITES 308: SHOULD BUDGETING TAKE PLACE IN A £340 MILLION CASE? TAXIS DRIVERS WANT TO KNOW THE FARE IN ADVANCE

November 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

The usual “cut off” point for costs budgeting is £10 million.  Here we are looking at a case where the court considering budgeting in a case with a value of £340 million.  The judgment contains interesting, and important, observations on…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (3): DOES THE ABSENCE OF A PENAL NOTICE PREVENT COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS? ARE THERE TWO TIERS OF COURT ORDER? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS STRONG VIEWS…

November 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

Does the absence of a penal notice on a court order mean that a party in default cannot be subject to committal proceedings?  This was the question addressed by the Court of Appeal in this case.  The possibility that litigants…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (2): THE CHIEF CONSTABLE IS THE PERSON WHO COPS IT

CONTEMPT OF COURT (2): THE CHIEF CONSTABLE IS THE PERSON WHO COPS IT

November 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content

We are continuing with the examination of the recent Court of Appeal decision on contempt of court.  In particular who is the entity in “contempt”? This may have far reaching consequences, as well as being specific to the actions of…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (1) CONTEMPT NEED NOT BE "CONTUMELIOUS" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS): WHY CHIEF CONSTABLES, CHIEF EXECUTIVES, MINISTERS OF STATE AND BOSSES EVERYWHERE NEED TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO LITIGATION

CONTEMPT OF COURT (1) CONTEMPT NEED NOT BE “CONTUMELIOUS” (WHATEVER THAT MEANS): WHY CHIEF CONSTABLES, CHIEF EXECUTIVES, MINISTERS OF STATE AND BOSSES EVERYWHERE NEED TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO LITIGATION

November 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am breaking down this important Court of Appeal decision into a number of parts. We have already looked at the judgment as to the numerous “misleading” witness statements that were filed.  The Court of Appeal also makes important observations…

APPEAL STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPELLANTS’ FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLIANT BUNDLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

All those involved in the appeal process, indeed litigation generally, are best advised to read this judgment.  It is about the standard the court’s expect when an appeal is being brought. It is also about procedural failures and failures to…

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Relief from sanctions

This year has see more than its fair share of cases relating to default, sanctions and wasted costs. Knowing what those cases are, the problems that arose, how they were caused and the results are essential skills for litigators.  More…

COURT CONSIDERS APPLICATION FOR FURTHER DISCLOSURE MADE ON THE THIRD DAY OF THE TRIAL: "THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE MANY MONTHS BEFORE..."

COURT CONSIDERS APPLICATION FOR FURTHER DISCLOSURE MADE ON THE THIRD DAY OF THE TRIAL: “THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE MANY MONTHS BEFORE…”

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

It is unusual for an application for further disclosure, particularly extensive disclosure, to be made part way through a trial. The judge considered such an application in this case.  This led to the obvious question – why wasn’t this application…

ANOTHER "BUNDLES" ISSUE: THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ON THE CITATION OF AUTHORITIES; "I'M PICKING UP BAD CITATIONS" - THE REMIX...

ANOTHER “BUNDLES” ISSUE: THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ON THE CITATION OF AUTHORITIES; “I’M PICKING UP BAD CITATIONS” – THE REMIX…

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is often worthwhile looking at short judgments or comments at the end of a case, particularly in the Court of Appeal. They sometimes contain little gems of  very useful information.  We see that here in the short judgment of…

MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT "WITHOUT MORE"?

MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT “WITHOUT MORE”?

November 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at case report which contains a reference to Mazur and appears to suggest that signature of an application by an unauthorised person means that the application is “liable to be struck out”.  As it turns out…

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 2: (MIS) CONDUCT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 2: (MIS) CONDUCT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Staying with the conference today.  Costs Judge Leonard gave an interesting talk on “conduct” in the assessment process which he, said was more accurately about “misconduct in the assessment process. (This was one of Judge Leonard’s slides. It highlights the…

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Today I am writing directly from the Association of Costs Lawyers conference in London. Unsurprisingly the first two speakers considered Mazur.  This is a highly abbreviated version of their talks.  ANDREW ROY KC Andrew, kindly referring to this blog as…

MAZUR MATTERS 34: "LEGAL EXECUTIVES" AND THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT LITIGATION AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION PAPER FROM 2010: ANOTHER PIECE OF THE "HOW HAS THIS HAPPENED"? JIGSAW

MAZUR MATTERS 34: “LEGAL EXECUTIVES” AND THE RIGHT TO CONDUCT LITIGATION AN INTERESTING DISCUSSION PAPER FROM 2010: ANOTHER PIECE OF THE “HOW HAS THIS HAPPENED”? JIGSAW

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We have, in the past few months, been addressing issues that arise from a statute passed some 18 years ago. The issues in relation to the obligation of solicitors and authorised persons (and only solicitors and authorised persons) to conduct litigation…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 35:  THE DEFENDANTS' ARGUMENT THAT THEY COULD RUN A PARTICULAR ARGUMENT ON THE BASIS OF THE CURRENT PLEADINGS WAS "NOTHING MORE THAN WISHFUL THINKING" (OR PERHAPS TANGERINE DREAMING)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 35: THE DEFENDANTS’ ARGUMENT THAT THEY COULD RUN A PARTICULAR ARGUMENT ON THE BASIS OF THE CURRENT PLEADINGS WAS “NOTHING MORE THAN WISHFUL THINKING” (OR PERHAPS TANGERINE DREAMING)

November 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we are looking at a pleadings issue that arose in the Intellectual Property Patents Court.   The scientific issues here may be complex, however the rules remain the same. The judge found that that the defendants’ pleaded case did not…

"LITIGANTS IN PERSON SHOULD BE WARY OF UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WHO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFEND OR PURSUE CASES BY REFERENCE TO SPURIOUS LEGAL ARGUMENTS, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE"

“LITIGANTS IN PERSON SHOULD BE WARY OF UNQUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS WHO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEFEND OR PURSUE CASES BY REFERENCE TO SPURIOUS LEGAL ARGUMENTS, WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE SUBSTANCE OF THE CASE”

November 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

It is rare for this blog to look at judgments from other jurisdictions.  However some words from the High Court of Ireland caught my eye.  It offers advice, in particular, to litigants in person. (This is not a warning in…

THE CLAIMANT RELIED ON A FALSE AUTHORITY: THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE LITIGANT TO CHECK THE CITATION

THE CLAIMANT RELIED ON A FALSE AUTHORITY: THE CONTEXT OF THIS CASE MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR THE LITIGANT TO CHECK THE CITATION

November 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are looking again at the phenomenon of “false” authorities. However in this case the courts were more forgiving of the litigant who had relied on a non-existent case.  The judgment does, however, show the need for care in legal…

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR...

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR…

November 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Webinar

It is that time of year when we can look back and reflect on events of the previous 12 months. Here we are looking at what lessons can be learnt from cases on default and sanctions since November 2024.  As…

COST BITES 305: THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO AWARD COSTS AGAINST A PARTY WHEN TWO ACTIONS WERE "JOINED" AND NOT "CONSOLIDATED": AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION IN THE RULES

COST BITES 305: THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO AWARD COSTS AGAINST A PARTY WHEN TWO ACTIONS WERE “JOINED” AND NOT “CONSOLIDATED”: AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION IN THE RULES

November 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are looking at a case where the appellant was successful in overturning an award for costs made against him in relation to one set of proceedings.  The judgment highlights the important distinction between “joinder” and “consolidation”.  That distinction can…

DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE:  SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?

DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?

November 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at a case where the defendants failed to comply with a peremptory order for disclosure.  The defences stood struck out.  The issue the judge had to determine was whether relief from sanctions should be granted. This in…

COST BITES 304: IN A DISPUTED WILL CASE WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? WHAT SHOULD THE BASIS OF THE ORDER BE? SHOULD THERE BE AN INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS?

COST BITES 304: IN A DISPUTED WILL CASE WHO SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? WHAT SHOULD THE BASIS OF THE ORDER BE? SHOULD THERE BE AN INTERIM ORDER FOR COSTS?

November 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interest, Interim Payments, Members Content

There are particular rules that relate to costs in probate proceedings. Here we look at a decision on costs that is of more general interest. The judge considered the issue of whether the unsuccessful defendant should pay the costs, the…

MAZUR MATTERS 30: BREAKING NEWS:  LEGAL SERVICES BOARD GRANTS CILEX'S APPLICATION FOR STAND ALONE LITIGATION RIGHTS

MAZUR MATTERS 30: BREAKING NEWS: LEGAL SERVICES BOARD GRANTS CILEX’S APPLICATION FOR STAND ALONE LITIGATION RIGHTS

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The Legal Services Board has today approved an application from CILEx Regulation to allow legal executives to obtain standalone litigation practice rights.  Here we have the announcement and the Decision Notice.  The finer detail will be considered when it becomes…

SERVICE POINTS 16:  DID THE COURT HAVE POWER TO STATE THAT SERVICE OF A CLAIM FORM AT THE HOUSE COMMONS COULD BE RATIFIED RETROSPECTIVELY?

SERVICE POINTS 16: DID THE COURT HAVE POWER TO STATE THAT SERVICE OF A CLAIM FORM AT THE HOUSE COMMONS COULD BE RATIFIED RETROSPECTIVELY?

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

We have already looked at this case at first instance, see Service Points 9,  the initial decision was considered by the Court of Appeal in the case we look at here.  The Court here was concerned with whether the courts…

MAZUR MATTERS 29: MORE  USEFUL LINKS: THE FOIL RESPONSE

MAZUR MATTERS 29: MORE USEFUL LINKS: THE FOIL RESPONSE

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Useful links

Here we are looking at another useful link.  FOIL (the Federation of Insurance Lawyers)  has produced a document dealing with the potential consequences of Mazur for its members. (FOIL has always been such a clever name.  This link shows that…

COST BITES 303:  THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED

COST BITES 303: THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at a case involving a bill of costs that was wholly defective that the costs judge was invited to strike it out.  The judge came very close, but reduced the bill by 75% instead.    There…

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking here at at case where an action was struck out because of  a failure to obtain permission of the court to issue proceedings. The judge rejected the claimant’s contention that the statute in question should be read…

DOES THE COUNTY COURT HAVE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE AN ACTION BROUGHT ON A FOREIGN JUDGMENT? SHOULD THE ACTION BE STRUCK OUT?

DOES THE COUNTY COURT HAVE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE AN ACTION BROUGHT ON A FOREIGN JUDGMENT? SHOULD THE ACTION BE STRUCK OUT?

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

Here we have the County Court considering an unusual issue of jurisdiction. Does it have jurisdiction to decide an action brought at common law on a foreign judgment? If it does not should the action be struck out or simply…

SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION MADE BY MISTAKE? A TEN YEAR OLD CASE THAT IS STILL OF INTEREST: CANDOUR HELPS A LOT

SHOULD A DEFENDANT BE ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW ADMISSION MADE BY MISTAKE? A TEN YEAR OLD CASE THAT IS STILL OF INTEREST: CANDOUR HELPS A LOT

October 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

This is a case about mistakes in litigation and the rules relating to allowing the withdrawal of a pre-action admission.  The judgment was given 10 years ago, but arrived on BAILII today.  The issues raised here remain highly relevant.  In…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 33: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS STRIKING OUT OF SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES: "OVER-COMPLICATED", "UNCLEAR". "LACKING IN THE MOST BASIC INFORMATION NECESSARY" (OH AND MANY OF THE CLAIMS WERE UNPLEADED...)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 33: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS STRIKING OUT OF SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES: “OVER-COMPLICATED”, “UNCLEAR”. “LACKING IN THE MOST BASIC INFORMATION NECESSARY” (OH AND MANY OF THE CLAIMS WERE UNPLEADED…)

October 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Schedules, Striking out

It is rare for a schedule of damages to come under close scrutiny prior to the trial itself.   Here the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out large parts of the appellants’ claim for damages.  Many of the…

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF...

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

No matter how long, and how much, you write about civil procedure cases can still come along which surprise – if not astonish. We have such a case here.  The judge found that, essentially, it was the client who played…

MEMBER NEWS: UPDATE ON THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINAR SERIES: THIS SITE WILL BE OFFLINE FOR AN HOUR ON THE 29th OCTOBER

MEMBER NEWS: UPDATE ON THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINAR SERIES: THIS SITE WILL BE OFFLINE FOR AN HOUR ON THE 29th OCTOBER

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Member news, Webinar

There are two pieces of news. Firstly the site is having a short “rest” on the 29th October, this is only for an hour – but it will be back newly invigorated.  Secondly a reminder of some of the webinars…

COST BITES 301: THE AARHUS COST CAP FIGURES ARE NOT SETT IN STONE: BUT IT VERY DIFFICULT TO PERSUADE A COURT TO CHANGE THEM

COST BITES 301: THE AARHUS COST CAP FIGURES ARE NOT SETT IN STONE: BUT IT VERY DIFFICULT TO PERSUADE A COURT TO CHANGE THEM

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

This may be the first time we have looked at the issue of costs and badgers.  We are looking at a case where the defendant sought to change the amounts of the “Aarhus cap” on the recoverability of costs in…

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL AND TO EXTEND TIME: THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK PERMISSION CAN EASILY BE MISSED: SOMETHING FOR WOULD BE APPELLANTS TO WATCH OUT FOR

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL AND TO EXTEND TIME: THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK PERMISSION CAN EASILY BE MISSED: SOMETHING FOR WOULD BE APPELLANTS TO WATCH OUT FOR

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The circumstances in which a judge at first instance can grant permission to appeal from their own decision are circumscribed by the rules.  Permission can only be given at the hearing itself, or any adjournment thereof.  The same applies to…

← Previous 1 … 9 10 11 … 28 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

  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 103: “THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PLEADING THE CLAIM RESTS ON THE CLAIMANT” (OH, AND MATTERS CANNOT BE ADDED IN A SKELETON ARGUMENT SERVED THE DAY BEFORE TRIAL…)
  • THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT
  • THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF COMPLYING WITH TIME LIMITS: “THERE WAS A WHOLESALE FAILURE TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE DEFAULTS”; “IT WAS ALL AS IF COMPLIANCE WERE OPTIONAL”
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE PROBLEMS THAT CAN OCCUR WITH THE CONTENTS OF THE CLAIM FORM: TEN KEY POINTS
  • BOOK REVIEW: CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION: A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE BY NEIL SUGARMAN

Top Posts

WRITING LETTERS TO THE JUDGE AFTER A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS CIRCULATED: "THIS IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE CONDUCT OF SOLICITORS CONDUCTING LITIGATION AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET"
FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
EXPERT WATCH 84: THE TRIAL JUDGE'S APPROACH TO THE EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS WRONG: THE APPROACH IN TUI HAD TO BE CONSIDERED: AN IMPORTANT DECISION FOR HOUSING LAWYERS...
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT

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.