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 21
RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE: WHAT IS MEANT BY CHAMBERS? CLAIMANT'S REPRESENTATIVE SENT HOME...

RIGHTS OF AUDIENCE: WHAT IS MEANT BY CHAMBERS? CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE SENT HOME…

July 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Christopher Buckingham for sending me a copy of the judgment in National Westminster Bank -v- Smith. (27th February 2019). A copy of which is attached here E6BA4N32 – National Westminster Bank PLC v Smith (27.02.19)…

PROVING THINGS 157: DEFECTS IN EVIDENCE "SO FUNDAMENTAL" THAT APPLICATION DISMISSED

PROVING THINGS 157: DEFECTS IN EVIDENCE “SO FUNDAMENTAL” THAT APPLICATION DISMISSED

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Mircom International Content Management & Consulting Ltd & Ors v Virgin Media Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 1827 (Ch) Mr Recorder Campbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application on the grounds that the evidence was…

"CAN A DEAD PERSON BE TAKEN TO COURT?" : CPR 19.8: A RECAP

“CAN A DEAD PERSON BE TAKEN TO COURT?” : CPR 19.8: A RECAP

July 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There have been a number of search terms arriving on this blog recently relating to the appropriate procedure when a party has died.  Today the question was “can a dead person be taken to court?”  This may be an opportune…

CASE NOT STRUCK OUT AFTER  A FOUR YEAR DELAY: ALTERNATIVE "SANCTION" ORDERED INSTEAD

CASE NOT STRUCK OUT AFTER A FOUR YEAR DELAY: ALTERNATIVE “SANCTION” ORDERED INSTEAD

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

In  Alba Exotic Fruit SH PK v MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. [2019] EWHC 1779 (Comm) HHJ Rawlings considered the appropriate sanction where there had been a four year delay by the claimant in pursuing an action. This case is…

A SECOND - IDENTICAL - APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS AND DISMISSED ON THAT GROUND ALONE

A SECOND – IDENTICAL – APPLICATION WAS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS AND DISMISSED ON THAT GROUND ALONE

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  Lambert v Forest of Dean District Council & Ors [2019] EWHC 1763 (Ch) ICC Judge Mullen rejected an application on the grounds that it was an abuse of process. An identical application had been made earlier and struck out…

I DON'T WANT YOUR SOLICITORS TO ACT FOR YOU: CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION REFUSED

I DON’T WANT YOUR SOLICITORS TO ACT FOR YOU: CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION REFUSED

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content

In Glencairn IP Holdings Ltd & Anor v Product Specialities Inc (t/a Final Touch) & Anor [2019] EWHC 1733 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon dismissed the claimant’s application for an injunction to prevent the defendants’ solicitors acting for them. THE CASE The…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 48: AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE  IS A REHEARING AND NOT A REVIEW (& NO NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE TIBBLES CRITERIA GETTING ITS CLAWS INTO THE CASE EITHER)

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 48: AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE IS A REHEARING AND NOT A REVIEW (& NO NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE TIBBLES CRITERIA GETTING ITS CLAWS INTO THE CASE EITHER)

July 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

One point that arose from the Court of Appeal decision in Al-Zahra (PVT) Hospital & Ors v DDM [2019] EWCA Civ 1103 contains observations which indicate that it is easy to lose sight of a basic point in relation to orders…

SHOULD THE COURT ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL ON LIMITATION? THE FUTILITY OF CITING DECIDED CASES:  "SCRIPTURE FROM WHICH THE DEVIL MAY FREELY QUOTE"

SHOULD THE COURT ORDER A SPLIT TRIAL ON LIMITATION? THE FUTILITY OF CITING DECIDED CASES: “SCRIPTURE FROM WHICH THE DEVIL MAY FREELY QUOTE”

June 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Limitation, Members Content

In Hutson v Tata Steel UK Ltd [2019] EWHC 1608 (QB) Mr Justice Turner refused the defendant’s application for a split trial on limitation in a group action.   The judgment makes it clear that there is no “burden” on any…

BENCH WARRANT ISSUED IN CIVIL ACTION: WARRANT ISSUED TO ENSURE DEFENDANT'S ATTENDANCE AT A HEARING

BENCH WARRANT ISSUED IN CIVIL ACTION: WARRANT ISSUED TO ENSURE DEFENDANT’S ATTENDANCE AT A HEARING

June 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Enforcement, Members Content

  In  Hanson & Ors v Carlino & Anor [2019] EWHC 1366 (Ch) Mr Justice Birss issued a bench warrant to ensure a defendant’s attendance at a hearing. The defendant had a history of non-compliance and attempts to avoid the…

MAKING APPLICATIONS IN ADVANCE OF A BREACH: WHY A STITCH IN TIME OFTEN, BUT NOT INVARIABLY, SAVES AN APPLICANT

MAKING APPLICATIONS IN ADVANCE OF A BREACH: WHY A STITCH IN TIME OFTEN, BUT NOT INVARIABLY, SAVES AN APPLICANT

June 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The post earlier today about the decision in Bedzhamov & Ors Re Vneshprombank LLC [2019] EWHC 1430 (Ch) was an example of the court refusing an application for an extension of time made in advance of the date of breach. The…

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION MADE AHEAD OF TIME REFUSED: AN UNREASONABLE SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY

APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION MADE AHEAD OF TIME REFUSED: AN UNREASONABLE SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY

June 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content

In Bedzhamov & Ors Re Vneshprombank LLC [2019] EWHC 1430 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk refused an application for an extension of time that had been made ahead of the date of compliance. In these circumstances the courts will normally grant…

WITHOUT NOTICE INJUNCTIONS 1: CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION GOES DOWN THE PAN

WITHOUT NOTICE INJUNCTIONS 1: CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN INJUNCTION GOES DOWN THE PAN

June 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Injunctions, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Brothers Enterprises Ltd v New World Hospitality UK Ltd [2017] EWHC 2455 (Ch) has only recently arrived on BAILLI. However it is a case that shows the importance of disclosure in relation to without notice injunctions.  What…

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON "SPECIALIST" EVIDENCE AS TO LIFE EXPECTANCY: THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH SUCH EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED AND CONSIDERED

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON “SPECIALIST” EVIDENCE AS TO LIFE EXPECTANCY: THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH SUCH EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED AND CONSIDERED

June 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Dodds v Arif & Anor [2019] EWHC 1512 (QB) Master Davison refused the defendant’s application to rely on a specialist report in relation to the claimant’s life expectancy. The judgment also contains an important summary of the circumstances in…

APPLICATION TO COMMIT REFUSED BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT WAS NOT IN BREACH OF THE ORDER: WORDS ARE IMPORTANT: THE NEED FOR REPRESENTATION IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS

APPLICATION TO COMMIT REFUSED BECAUSE THE DEFENDANT WAS NOT IN BREACH OF THE ORDER: WORDS ARE IMPORTANT: THE NEED FOR REPRESENTATION IN COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS

June 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Committal proceedings, Members Content

A constant, worrying, theme on this blog has been the need for (and funding of) representation of defendants in civil committal proceedings.  These concerns run alongside the many and manifest procedural errors that applicants (and sometimes judges) make when committal…

FOOTBALL CLUB'S APPLICATION DOES NOT GET EXTRA TIME: APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN ORDER TO DISPUTE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS IS REFUSED

FOOTBALL CLUB’S APPLICATION DOES NOT GET EXTRA TIME: APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN ORDER TO DISPUTE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS IS REFUSED

June 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In UTB LLC v Sheffield United Ltd [2019] EWHC 1377 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt refused  Sheffield United’s application for relief from sanctions so as to allow it to dispute the authenticity of documents during the course of a trial. “A…

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

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

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

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

PROCEDURAL ISSUES ON COMMITTAL APPLICATIONS: GETTING THE PROCEDURE RIGHT

PROCEDURAL ISSUES ON COMMITTAL APPLICATIONS: GETTING THE PROCEDURE RIGHT

June 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Quantum Tuning Ltd v White [2019] EWHC 1376 (QB) highlights some errors made in a committal application. Fortunately for the claimant in that case the procedural errors were overlooked and contempt established. Nevertheless…

ASKING QUESTIONS AFTER JUDGMENT: NOT TO BE USED IN AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN THE CASE (OR ARGUE A DIFFERENT CASE ON DIFFERENT GROUNDS)

ASKING QUESTIONS AFTER JUDGMENT: NOT TO BE USED IN AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN THE CASE (OR ARGUE A DIFFERENT CASE ON DIFFERENT GROUNDS)

June 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am looking again at the decision in  O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23. That case predates the more recent Court of Appeal judgment in  Children [2019] EWCA Civ 898. However it is another example of a party attempting to use the…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ADVICE FROM ACROSS THE PROFESSION AND AROUND THE WORLD: "CROWD SOURCED" GUIDANCE: THANKS FOR ALL THE TWEETS

ADVICE FROM ACROSS THE PROFESSION AND AROUND THE WORLD: “CROWD SOURCED” GUIDANCE: THANKS FOR ALL THE TWEETS

May 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

There have been a number of occasions when I have put contributions from people on Twitter on this blog.  This is usually in response to specific questions and issues raised. People have been generous in their time and Advice.  I…

TRYING TO SERVE A SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT'S REPORT: WHEN DO THE DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY?

TRYING TO SERVE A SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT’S REPORT: WHEN DO THE DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY?

May 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Global Horizons Corporation -v- Gray [2019] EWHC 1132 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold considered the question of when the Denton principles apply to service of a “supplementary” medical report.   “… the question of whether an application for permission to…

TELEPHONE HEARINGS WHEN COUNSEL WON'T ANSWER THE TELEPHONE: THE  UNHAPPY LORD JUSTICE

TELEPHONE HEARINGS WHEN COUNSEL WON’T ANSWER THE TELEPHONE: THE UNHAPPY LORD JUSTICE

May 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a short judgment recently arrived on BAILLI which fits in well with the earlier post about telephone and electronic hearings. In Nixon & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWCA Civ 2694 Lord Justice…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 45: THE COURT CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 45: THE COURT CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL

May 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

We are looking at CPR 33.2(3) in relation to the reducing of witnesses or identifying issues prior to trial. THE RULE CPR 32.2(3)   “(3) The court may give directions – (a) identifying or limiting the issues to which factual…

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 4: TIME ESTIMATES FOR HEARINGS (AND WHY YOU SHOULD VISIT KINGSTON UPON HULL)

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 4: TIME ESTIMATES FOR HEARINGS (AND WHY YOU SHOULD VISIT KINGSTON UPON HULL)

May 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There were difficult choices to be made when delegates selected their particular lectures at the recent APIL conference. In a show of northern solidarity (and because I am interested in these kind of things) I went to see District Judge…

DEFENDANT CAN ONLY RESPOND TO THE CASE AS PLEADED: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANTS' ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ISSUES

DEFENDANT CAN ONLY RESPOND TO THE CASE AS PLEADED: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANTS’ ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ISSUES

May 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

There are two judgments on BAILLI this morning in the Glaxosmithkline case where the judge has resisted the claimants’ attempts to widen the scope of their case beyond the pleaded case and the issues set out in a Group Litigation…

JUDGE REFUSES TO RECUSE HIMSELF: DEFENDANT APPEALS: APPEAL DISMISSED: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE POST OFFICE SAGA:  ATTEMPTS TO HOLD THE COURT "IN TERROREM" SHOULD BE EXPLAINED

JUDGE REFUSES TO RECUSE HIMSELF: DEFENDANT APPEALS: APPEAL DISMISSED: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE POST OFFICE SAGA: ATTEMPTS TO HOLD THE COURT “IN TERROREM” SHOULD BE EXPLAINED

May 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

I did not blog, immediately, after the judgment in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (No 4) [2019] EWHC 871 (QB because I suspected (indeed it was inevitable, given its approach to this litigation) that the Post Office would…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 42: WHY A DAY EARLY IS SO VERY DIFFERENT TO A DAY LATE: THE ROBERT CRITERIA

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 42: WHY A DAY EARLY IS SO VERY DIFFERENT TO A DAY LATE: THE ROBERT CRITERIA

May 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a world of different between a prospective and retrospective application to extend time, or comply with an order.   Every litigator has to know about Robert -v- Momentum Services [2003] EWCA Civ 229.  An application made in advance means that the…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 41: SEEKING CLARIFICATION OF A PART 36 OFFER: CPR 36.8

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 41: SEEKING CLARIFICATION OF A PART 36 OFFER: CPR 36.8

May 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

The decision in Calonne Construction Ltd v Dawnus Southern Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 754 , looked at earlier in this blog highlighted one part of CPR Part 36 that often goes unnoticed.  It is important that a recipient of a Part 36 offer…

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

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

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

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

ALLOCATION TO LEVEL OF JUDGE :  "FAME" DOESN'T MATTER - THE TIME IT WILL TAKE TO OBTAIN A HEARING DOES

ALLOCATION TO LEVEL OF JUDGE : “FAME” DOESN’T MATTER – THE TIME IT WILL TAKE TO OBTAIN A HEARING DOES

April 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Schumacher v Clarke [2019] EWHC 1031 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh held that the time it would take to obtain a hearing date is a factor in relation to which judge the matter would be allocated to. The Master also…

FRESH EYES NOT A GOOD REASON FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND: COURT REFUSED CLAIMANT'S LATE APPLICATION TO RE-CAST ITS CASE

FRESH EYES NOT A GOOD REASON FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND: COURT REFUSED CLAIMANT’S LATE APPLICATION TO RE-CAST ITS CASE

April 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  Donovan & Anor v Grainmarket Asset Management LLP [2019] EWHC 1023 (QB) Martin Griffiths QC, sitting as a High Court judge, disallowed a late application to amend.  It is another example of an application being made shortly before trial,…

WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS: THE DUTY OF FULL AND FAIR DISCLOSURE - A CASE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT

WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS: THE DUTY OF FULL AND FAIR DISCLOSURE – A CASE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT

April 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content

There is an interesting discussion of the duty to give full and fair disclosure in the judgment of HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Wild Brain Family International Ltd v Robson & Anor [2018] EWHC 3163 (Ch). …

WHAT'S IN THE BAG? ADVICE ON WHAT TO TAKE TO COURT: HANDKERCHIEFS, PENS AND ... TUNNOCKS

WHAT’S IN THE BAG? ADVICE ON WHAT TO TAKE TO COURT: HANDKERCHIEFS, PENS AND … TUNNOCKS

April 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Members Content

As part of the series where contributions are invited from Twitter I asked what advice on what advocates should take to court with them.  What essentials should be in the bag? Not all the contributions should be taken too seriously,…

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: SERVICE AT "LAST KNOWN ADDRESS" FAILS: SERVICE BASED ON COMPANIES ACT SUCCEEDS

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: SERVICE AT “LAST KNOWN ADDRESS” FAILS: SERVICE BASED ON COMPANIES ACT SUCCEEDS

April 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Cases on the last known address for service seem to come along like buses – a few at at time. The issue was considered by Mr Richard Salter QC (setting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) in Idemia…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: DANGERS OF SERVING AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS (2019)

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: DANGERS OF SERVING AT THE LAST KNOWN ADDRESS (2019)

April 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

It is difficult for a month, sometimes a week, to pass without there being a service of the claim form case.  The issue of service was central to the decision of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Brayshaw -v- Partners of…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE TOMORROW

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE TOMORROW

April 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes

Why anyone chose a Saturday as the implementation date for new rules may be a mystery.  Nevertheless new rules are in force from tomorrow.   Two crucial items: court bundles and writing directly to the court have already been looked at. …

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

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

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

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

NOT COMPLYING WITH DIRECTIONS OR REPLYING TO CORRESPONDENCE - AND THEN BLAMING THE OTHER SIDE: IT DOES YOU NO CREDIT

NOT COMPLYING WITH DIRECTIONS OR REPLYING TO CORRESPONDENCE – AND THEN BLAMING THE OTHER SIDE: IT DOES YOU NO CREDIT

April 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Statements of Case

There are several matters of general interest in the judgment of Mrs Justice Pepperall in Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd [2019] EWHC 819 (TCC) (02 April 2019).  Here we look at the dangers of simply failing to…

"LAST KNOWN ADDRESS" : CLAIMANT HAD TAKEN REASONABLE STEPS : EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE CLAIM FORM UPHELD

“LAST KNOWN ADDRESS” : CLAIMANT HAD TAKEN REASONABLE STEPS : EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE CLAIM FORM UPHELD

March 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form

In Colley V Shuker & Ors [2019] EWHC 781 (QB) Mrs Justice O’Farell upheld an order extending time for service of the claim form.  The judgment considers, but does not decide, whether the claimant had taken reasonable steps to establish…

"PLEADINGS THAT ARE OF SUCH DISPROPORTIONATE LENGTH AND DENSITY": "THE CLAIM BECAME IMPENETRABLE AND UNNECESSARILY EXPENSIVE TO DEAL WITH"

“PLEADINGS THAT ARE OF SUCH DISPROPORTIONATE LENGTH AND DENSITY”: “THE CLAIM BECAME IMPENETRABLE AND UNNECESSARILY EXPENSIVE TO DEAL WITH”

March 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Galazi& Anor v Christoforou & Ors [2019] EWHC 670 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh considered the costs consequences of amendment and the effective discontinuance of certain causes of action.  There are two particular aspects of the judgment of general interest. Firstly…

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER WHEN THE DEFENDANT DID NOT APPEAR: THE RULES SHOULD BE FOLLOWED

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER WHEN THE DEFENDANT DID NOT APPEAR: THE RULES SHOULD BE FOLLOWED

March 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

There are several unusual aspects about the decision of Salix Homes v Mantato [2019] EWCA Civ 445, not least it is an appeal directly from a Deputy District Judge to the Court of Appeal. In addition to the point of  law…

LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND DEFENCE AND WITHDRAW ADMISSION REFUSED: EVE OF TRIAL APPLICATIONS USUALLY CAUSE PROBLEMS

LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND DEFENCE AND WITHDRAW ADMISSION REFUSED: EVE OF TRIAL APPLICATIONS USUALLY CAUSE PROBLEMS

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Applications, Members Content

There is a second reason to look at the judgment today  by Mr Justice Arnold in Freshasia Foods Ltd v Lu [2019] EWHC 638 (Ch).  There was a decision in the judgment on a late application to amend and withdraw from an admission. …

LIABILITY OF McKENZIE FRIEND: EXCLUSIVE NOTE OF JUDGMENT:

March 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Personal Injury, Professional negligence,

There was considerable discussion yesterday about the decision of HHJ Eady (sitting as a High Court judge) in Wright -v-Troy Lucas. My colleague Colm Nugent has been kind enough to send me  a note of the judgment (where he appeared…

INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS IN HIGH VALUE CASES: THE IMPORTANCE OF CASHFLOW RECOGNISED IN SHEFFIELD

INTERIM PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS IN HIGH VALUE CASES: THE IMPORTANCE OF CASHFLOW RECOGNISED IN SHEFFIELD

March 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Jim Gladman from Switalskis, solicitors for sending me a copy of the approved judgment of HHJ Robinson in I -v- Hull & East Yorkshire NHS Trust (25th February 2019).  A copy of that judgment is available…

BANKRUPTCY PETITION NOT SERVED PROPERLY: BANKRUPTCY NOT ANNULLED

BANKRUPTCY PETITION NOT SERVED PROPERLY: BANKRUPTCY NOT ANNULLED

March 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment

There may well be a disturbance in the Force if there is not a service of the claim form case every few weeks.  In Ardawa v Uppal & Anor [2019] EWHC 456 (Ch) Mr Justice Roth held that a judge could…

TIMING OF APPLICATIONS FOR ANONYMITY: CLAIMANTS SHOULD ACT WELL BEFORE TRIAL

TIMING OF APPLICATIONS FOR ANONYMITY: CLAIMANTS SHOULD ACT WELL BEFORE TRIAL

March 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Zeromska-Smith v United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 552 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer refused the claimant’s application for anonymity.  He made important observations about when such an application should normally be made. THE TIMING OF APPLICATIONS After refusing…

"OUTSIDE THE REALMS OF FICTION", NOT NECESSARILY A PRUDENT WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION: WITNESS STATEMENTS, WITNESS SUMMARIES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS:

“OUTSIDE THE REALMS OF FICTION”, NOT NECESSARILY A PRUDENT WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION: WITNESS STATEMENTS, WITNESS SUMMARIES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS:

March 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In  Otuo v The Watch Tower Bible And Tract Society of Britain (Relief from Sanctions 2) [2019] EWHC 346 (QB) Mr Justice Warby granted limited relief from sanctions to a litigant in person who had served “witness summaries” rather than witness…

← Previous 1 … 20 21 22 … 25 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

  • COST BITES 411: NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST CLAIMANT’S DIRECTOR : HE WHO EXPECTS TO BENEFIT RUNS A RISK OF PAYING THE COSTS…
  • THE TCC GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: A DETAILED EXAMINATION
  • NEW (4th) EDITION OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT GUIDE 2026: A QUICK GUIDE TO THE CHANGES AND THE NEW PARTS
  • AN INTRODUCTION TO THE CORONER’S COURT FOR PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS 2026: WEBINAR 17th JULY 2026
  • EXPERT WATCH 57: JUDGE DECIDES THAT AN EXPERT, THAT HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THEIR DUTIES TO THE COURT, SHOULD BE NAMED; “HE HAD A CHOICE TO INVOLVE HIMSELF IN THESE PROCEEDINGS AND TO BE PAID FOR DOING SO…”

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

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.