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 22
THE DANGERS OF BEING "BULLISH" ON PROCEDURAL ISSUES: APPLICATION DISMISSED (AND IT TOOK TOO LONG)

THE DANGERS OF BEING “BULLISH” ON PROCEDURAL ISSUES: APPLICATION DISMISSED (AND IT TOOK TOO LONG)

November 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Witness statements

In Red Bull GmbH v Big Horn UK Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2794 (Ch) Master Clark completed the judgment”I conclude by noting the regrettable extent to which this judgment has been lengthened by the determination of the procedural points of…

101st CPR UPDATE: WELCOME TO THE VIDEO LINK WORLD

101st CPR UPDATE: WELCOME TO THE VIDEO LINK WORLD

November 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Rule Changes, Setting aside judgment

The 101st update to the Civil Procedure Rules apply from 8th and 30th November 2018.  The main development is a procedure whereby applications to set aside default judgment may be heard by video link. SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENTS: HEARD BY…

AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE A WITHOUT NOTICE ORDER IS NOT SUBJECT TO "TIBBLES" CRITERIA: SOMETIMES DENTON DOES NOT APPLY - OR SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED

AN APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE A WITHOUT NOTICE ORDER IS NOT SUBJECT TO “TIBBLES” CRITERIA: SOMETIMES DENTON DOES NOT APPLY – OR SHOULD NOT BE APPLIED

November 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

There is a short passage in the judgment of Mr Justice Pepperall in Berhad v Frazer-Nash Research Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2970 (QB) in relation to late service of evidence before an interlocutory hearing. The judge held that the Denton…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5:  IF YOU DON'T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 5: IF YOU DON’T PAY COSTS BEFORE ISSUE IT COULD BE VERY EXPENSIVE AFTERWARDS

November 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp for sending me a copy of the High Court decision in Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB). It is one of those cases that illustrate…

BREXIT AND.... ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES FOR COURT HEARINGS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP

BREXIT AND…. ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES FOR COURT HEARINGS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment in AIG Europe Ltd & Anor, Re [2018] EWHC 2818 (Ch) has already been the subject of some consternation, starting as it does with the words ” This case concerns the reorganisation of a major insurance company to prepare…

NON COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: STRIKING OUT; LATE ATTEMPTS TO COMPLY; LATE "ACCEPTANCE" OF PART 36 OFFERS AND NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

NON COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: STRIKING OUT; LATE ATTEMPTS TO COMPLY; LATE “ACCEPTANCE” OF PART 36 OFFERS AND NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Part 36, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Sanctions, Serving documents, Striking out

In Devoy-Williams -v- High Cartwright & Amin [2018] EWHC 2815 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk upheld a decision that an action was struck out and that relief from sanctions should not be granted. It is a reminder (amongst other things)  of…

TRYING TO SNEAK EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT: PEOPLE MIGHT NOTICE: DEFENDANT'S ATTEMPT TO EXHIBIT EXPERTS STRUCK OUT

TRYING TO SNEAK EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT: PEOPLE MIGHT NOTICE: DEFENDANT’S ATTEMPT TO EXHIBIT EXPERTS STRUCK OUT

October 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There have been numerous cases in which parties have attempted to give expert evidence in witness statements.  Another example can be seen in the decision in New Media Distribution Company Sezc Ltd v Kagalovsky [2018] EWHC 2742 (Ch). An attempt to…

NEW WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED TO CASE MANAGEMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTIONS IS THE ONLY SAFE OPTION

NEW WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED TO CASE MANAGEMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTIONS IS THE ONLY SAFE OPTION

October 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In SJ Moore (Jeweller) Limited -v- Squibb Group Limited [2018] EWHC 2731 (QB) Denton principles were considered and applied when the defendant wanted to adduce new evidence.  What is notable  here is the fact that the defendant had the expert…

COURT STEPS OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ABUSE

COURT STEPS OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ABUSE

October 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) guards its fixed costs regime very jealously. Prior to the decision in Link Up Mitaka Ltd (t/a Thebigword) v Language Empire Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2728 there appears to have only been one previous…

MARMITE: SKELETON ARGUMENTS: "SO CALLED": ATTEMPTS TO APPEAL THE FACTS: A SPREAD OF ISSUES CONSIDERED

MARMITE: SKELETON ARGUMENTS: “SO CALLED”: ATTEMPTS TO APPEAL THE FACTS: A SPREAD OF ISSUES CONSIDERED

October 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Solicitors Regulation Authority v Day & Ors [2018] EWHC 2726 the Divisional Court rejected the SRA’s appeal against a decision of the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal. There are some interesting comments about the number of documents and the length of skeleton’s…

A HARSH REMINDER: IF YOU DON'T TURN UP FOR TRIAL THEN THE TEST FOR SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE IS VERY TOUGH: BE PROMPT, BE VERY PROMPT

A HARSH REMINDER: IF YOU DON’T TURN UP FOR TRIAL THEN THE TEST FOR SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE IS VERY TOUGH: BE PROMPT, BE VERY PROMPT

October 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

In Lomax & Ors v Greenslade [2018] EWHC 2623 (Ch)  Mr Justice Henry Carr refused to set aside a judgment obtained after the defendant failed to attend trial. There was a major mistake on the part of the court, however the…

SOLICITORS CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO HAND OVER FILES: HIGH COURT DECISION

SOLICITORS CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO HAND OVER FILES: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Hanley v J C & A Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2592 (QB) Mr Justice Soole decided that the court did not have inherent power to compel solicitors to hand over copies of documents to their former clients. THE CASE Three claimants…

AVOIDING PROCEDURAL PITFALLS - AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT: WEBINAR 6th DECEMBER 2018: HELPING LITIGATORS SLEEP SOUNDLY AT NIGHT...

AVOIDING PROCEDURAL PITFALLS – AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT: WEBINAR 6th DECEMBER 2018: HELPING LITIGATORS SLEEP SOUNDLY AT NIGHT…

October 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Courses, Members Content

On the 6th December I am presenting a webinar “Avoiding Procedural Pitfalls and Putting Them Right”. The aim is to look at the key problem areas of civil procedure, how to avoid problems and how to rectify problems if things…

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER ON COURT'S OWN INITIATIVE: A REDETERMINATION OF THE  MATTER AND NOT SUBJECT TO TIBBLES PRINCIPLES

SETTING ASIDE AN ORDER ON COURT’S OWN INITIATIVE: A REDETERMINATION OF THE MATTER AND NOT SUBJECT TO TIBBLES PRINCIPLES

August 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a short passage in the judgment today of Master Clark in Massimo Osti SRL v Global Design And Innovation Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2263 (Ch) that provides an important reminder of the relevant principles that apply when a…

DON'T DELAY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: A NAIL IN THE COFFIN FOR CLAIMANTS WHO DECIDE TO WAIT

DON’T DELAY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM JUST BECAUSE YOU DON’T HAVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: A NAIL IN THE COFFIN FOR CLAIMANTS WHO DECIDE TO WAIT

August 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form

There is another aspect of the judgment in Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd v Woodward & Anor [2018] EWHC 2152 (Ch) that needs highlighting. The lesson here is clear:  you cannot delay service of the claim form on the grounds that you…

LIMITATION: SECTION 33 IN A FATAL DISEASE CASE: CASE ALLOWED TO PROCEED AFTER 25 YEAR DELAY

LIMITATION: SECTION 33 IN A FATAL DISEASE CASE: CASE ALLOWED TO PROCEED AFTER 25 YEAR DELAY

August 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Fatal Accidents, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

In  Pearce & Ors v The Secretary of State for Business, Energy And Industrial Strategy & Ors [2018] EWHC 2009 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the principles relating to Section 33 of the Limitation Act 1980 and granted an application where…

THE KIMATHI DECISION 5: REVIEW OF SECTION 33 PRINCIPLES: WHY LIMITATION WASN'T HEARD FIRST

THE KIMATHI DECISION 5: REVIEW OF SECTION 33 PRINCIPLES: WHY LIMITATION WASN’T HEARD FIRST

August 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

This is the fifth in the series that looks at the decision of Mr Justice Stewart in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 2066 (QB).  The judgment contains a useful review and survey of Section 33 and…

YOU'VE STARTED SO YOU'LL FINISH: MASTER SETS ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE SERVED BY INSURER

YOU’VE STARTED SO YOU’LL FINISH: MASTER SETS ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE SERVED BY INSURER

August 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Insurance, Members Content

In Advantage Insurance Co Ltd v Stoodley & Anor [2018] EWHC 2135 (QB) Master Davison set aside the claimant’s notice of discontinuance made after reading the defendant’s  additional written submissions after a hearing.  The notice of discontinuance was viewed as “tactical….

YOU LOST AT TRIAL - YOU ARE NOT GETTING A SECOND GO: THE JUDGMENT IS HAIR TODAY AND WILL NOT BE GONE TOMORROW...

YOU LOST AT TRIAL – YOU ARE NOT GETTING A SECOND GO: THE JUDGMENT IS HAIR TODAY AND WILL NOT BE GONE TOMORROW…

July 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Liqwd Inc & Anor v L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 1845 (Pat) Mr Justice Birss refused a defendant’s application to “reopen the trial and decide one of the issues afresh” taking into account new evidence. “Many litigants, having…

WHEN IS A REPORT NOT A MEDICAL REPORT?  RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A "MEDICAL REPORT" WITH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

WHEN IS A REPORT NOT A MEDICAL REPORT? RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A “MEDICAL REPORT” WITH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

July 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

In a judgment given today at Leeds County Court His Honour Judge Gosnell held that a claimant, seeking damages for industrial deafness, breached the rules when issuing by not serving a medical report but serving an “AMR” report.  The judge,…

HOME SECRETARY REFUSED PERMISSION TO SERVE EVIDENCE LATE: THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE WAS USED EVEN IF DENTON DID NOT APPLY

HOME SECRETARY REFUSED PERMISSION TO SERVE EVIDENCE LATE: THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE WAS USED EVEN IF DENTON DID NOT APPLY

June 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Teh v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWHC 1586 (Admin) the Secretary of State was refused permission to rely on evidence served late.  The issue was decided under the Overriding Objective, rather than by reference to the…

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 7: THE "BACK TO BASICS" SERIES

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 7: THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES

June 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

I am looking back at the posts that have been part of a series over the past five years. The “Back to Basics” posts are part of  a series that is  very much ongoing. The aim of each post is…

THE LIMITS OF DECLARATORY RELIEF: THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR IT: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENTS (AND PLEADINGS) FAIL TO RAISE THE ROOF

THE LIMITS OF DECLARATORY RELIEF: THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR IT: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS (AND PLEADINGS) FAIL TO RAISE THE ROOF

June 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

I am grateful to my colleague John de Waal QC at Hardwicke for  bringing my attention to the judgment of Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Office Depot International (UK) Ltd v UBS Asset Management (UK) Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 1494 (TCC).  It…

PROVING THINGS 112: ITS NO USE JUST WAVING ACCOUNTANT'S REPORTS AROUND

PROVING THINGS 112: ITS NO USE JUST WAVING ACCOUNTANT’S REPORTS AROUND

June 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

In  Berkshire Homes (Northern) Ltd v Newbury Venture Capital Ltd [2018] EWHC 938 (Ch) the respondent relied on accountant’s reports in an attempt to prove its case. The case shows that it is insufficient just to produce accounts. Evidence has to…

JUDGES CANNOT MAGICALLY ACQUIRE INFORMATION BY OSMOSIS:  THE DUTY ON PARTIES TO ENCAPSULATE LONG-RUNNING LITIGATION

JUDGES CANNOT MAGICALLY ACQUIRE INFORMATION BY OSMOSIS: THE DUTY ON PARTIES TO ENCAPSULATE LONG-RUNNING LITIGATION

June 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content

In SC BTA Bank v Ablyazov & Anor [2018] EWHC 1368 (Comm) Patrica Robertson QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) reminded practitioners that judges have no magical powers. When a long-running case on a “grand scale” comes before the court…

TRANSFER FROM COUNTY COURT TO HIGH COURT: YOU CAN ASK  FOR THIS ONLY ONCE:  A DISCRETION TO BE EXERCISED "WITH GREAT CIRCUMSPECTION"

TRANSFER FROM COUNTY COURT TO HIGH COURT: YOU CAN ASK FOR THIS ONLY ONCE: A DISCRETION TO BE EXERCISED “WITH GREAT CIRCUMSPECTION”

June 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Case Management, Members Content

In Bass v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 1297 (QB) Master Davison held it was an abuse of process for a party to make  an application to transfer to the High Court when a similar application had been made, and refused,…

"AVOIDING PAROCHIALISM": TRANSFER BETWEEN DIVISIONS - NO EVIDENCE ONE DIVISION IS BETTER THAN ANOTHER

“AVOIDING PAROCHIALISM”: TRANSFER BETWEEN DIVISIONS – NO EVIDENCE ONE DIVISION IS BETTER THAN ANOTHER

May 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content

In Mezvinsky & Anor v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2018] EWHC 1261 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh refused an application to transfer from the Business and Property Courts to the Media and Communications List. “the court hearing an application for transfer must be…

PROVING THINGS 94: : THE DEFENDANT WANTS TO CHOOSE BOTH THE CLAIMANT’S LITIGATION FRIEND AND SOLICITOR: EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT FAR FROM COMPELLING

May 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There are some audacious applications. However an application by defendants  that attempts to dictate who the claimant’s  litigation friend should be, and who their solicitor should be, should – at the very least – be backed up by firm evidence. …

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO A CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT FAILED TO GET PERMISSION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO A CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT FAILED TO GET PERMISSION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS

May 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Although the Denton principles are much more settled it is prudent to keep a weather eye on cases where they are considered. His Honour Judge Davis-White QC (sitting as a judge of the Chancery Division in Leeds) applied the Denton principles in a…

NO LUCK WHEN REACHING FOR THE SKY: LITIGANTS SEEKING A SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY FROM THE TRIAL JUDGE GET SHORT SHRIFT

NO LUCK WHEN REACHING FOR THE SKY: LITIGANTS SEEKING A SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY FROM THE TRIAL JUDGE GET SHORT SHRIFT

April 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content

In an earlier post about the case of P (A Child), Re [2018] EWCA Civ 720 we looked at an example where the parties (all the parties in the case) had correctly used the guidance in English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd [2002]…

THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

THE CLEVELAND BRIDGE CASE: A SECOND CROSSING: PAYMENTS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content

Judgments dealing with payments on account of costs are rare, but illuminating.  Particularly when the costs budget is taken as the starting point. There is a detailed consideration of this issue in Cleveland Bridge UK Ltd v Sarens (UK) Ltd [2018]…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 2:  "EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT" OF AN APPLICATION

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 2: “EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT” OF AN APPLICATION

April 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post looked at some of the basic requirements of an application to the court.  Here we look at  the evidence that may be needed in support of an application.  The key point here being “evidence”.  Numerous hours are…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 1: THE HUMBLE APPLICATION: WORDING AND TIMING

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 1: THE HUMBLE APPLICATION: WORDING AND TIMING

April 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content

Last year I was giving an in-house talk at a very prominent firm of litigation solicitors.  The litigation partner present (a person of immense experience) made the point that the firm were continually having talks and education on esoteric and…

"PERSUASION": APPLICATIONS & EVIDENCE: ATTEND A COURSE AND SUPPORT CHILDREN'S LITERACY: 18th APRIL 2018 - LINCOLN'S INN

“PERSUASION”: APPLICATIONS & EVIDENCE: ATTEND A COURSE AND SUPPORT CHILDREN’S LITERACY: 18th APRIL 2018 – LINCOLN’S INN

April 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Courses, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

On the 18th April 2018 I am involved in a talk at Hardwicke, in Lincoln’s Inn. With a number of my colleagues  we are talking on “Persuasion” Applications and Evidence for Defendants and Insurers”.  All proceeds go directly to a…

YOU APPEAL DECISIONS NOT REASONS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN RELATION TO AN ARGUMENT THAT DID NOT CHANGE OUTCOME OF THE CASE

YOU APPEAL DECISIONS NOT REASONS: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED IN RELATION TO AN ARGUMENT THAT DID NOT CHANGE OUTCOME OF THE CASE

April 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

In  Civilians v Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 690 (QB) Mr Justice Leggatt  rejected the defendant’s application for permission to appeal. The proposed appeal was wholly academic in the sense that it had no impact on the outcome of the case. THE…

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

March 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

On the 18th April 2018 I am,  with a number of my colleagues from Hardwicke, giving a talk on “Applications for Defendants”*.  The judgment this week in St Clair v King & Anor [2018] EWHC 682 (Ch) may well feature.   It…

A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT AN OPEN INVITATION TO TAKE A SECOND BITE AT THE CHERRY: AN OVERUSED TACTIC

A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT AN OPEN INVITATION TO TAKE A SECOND BITE AT THE CHERRY: AN OVERUSED TACTIC

March 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Judgment, Members Content

In Gosvenor London Ltd v Aygun Aluminium UK Ltd [2018] EWHC 227 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser made it clear that draft judgments were not to be taken as an invitation to the parties to embark on a second round of submissions….

THE TIME FOR CHALLENGING A BILL HAS PROBABLY LONG GONE: AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REFUSING AN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY UP

THE TIME FOR CHALLENGING A BILL HAS PROBABLY LONG GONE: AN IMPORTANT FACTOR IN REFUSING AN APPLICATION FOR DELIVERY UP

March 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

There is a battle (or a series of skirmishes) going on at present in relation to solicitors charging success fees to their clients in personal injury cases. This has led to numerous applications to the courts for disclosure.  The former…

NO "GRANDSTANDING" PLEASE: THE COURT IS NOT ASSISTED BY RHETORICAL POINTS

NO “GRANDSTANDING” PLEASE: THE COURT IS NOT ASSISTED BY RHETORICAL POINTS

March 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Conduct, Members Content

It has been a week for the courts commenting on advocates.  Earlier we had complaints of advocates interrupting each other. Today we have complaints of “grandstanding”. Reminding advocates that their task is to deal with the legal issues at hand…

THE LIMITATION PERIOD IS JUST ABOUT TO EXPIRE AND YOU ARE NOT READY:  FIVE KEY POINTS FOR WHEN YOU DICE WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH

THE LIMITATION PERIOD IS JUST ABOUT TO EXPIRE AND YOU ARE NOT READY: FIVE KEY POINTS FOR WHEN YOU DICE WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH

March 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

No matter how hard litigators try (and how many warnings are given) it appears inevitable that, sooner or later, you are going to have a case where the limitation period is about to expire but you are not ready.  The…

PARTIES MUST OBTAIN AN ORDER FOR A HEARING OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: (MORE ON LENGTHY SKELETON ARGUMENTS)

PARTIES MUST OBTAIN AN ORDER FOR A HEARING OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: (MORE ON LENGTHY SKELETON ARGUMENTS)

March 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Members Content, Written advocacy

In Bokova v Associated Newspapers Ltd [2018] EWHC 320 (QB) Mr Justice Dingemans considered several important issues of procedure.   Firstly the need for parties to obtain an order for a hearing on a preliminary issue rather than simply turning up on…

TIME ESTIMATES: PROBLEMS WHEN THE ESTIMATES ARE TOO SHORT: STILL LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE

TIME ESTIMATES: PROBLEMS WHEN THE ESTIMATES ARE TOO SHORT: STILL LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE

February 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Members Content

I have been searching (so far unsuccessfully) for guidance to litigators and litigants to help provide accurate time estimates.  This may well be more of an art than a science. However it is a skill that needs honing. Not only…

THE COURT "REGRETTED IF NOT DEPLORED" EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE ON JURISDICTION ISSUES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

THE COURT “REGRETTED IF NOT DEPLORED” EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE ON JURISDICTION ISSUES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

February 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Case Management, Members Content, Proportionality

In Ogale Community & Ors v Royal Dutch Shell Plc & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 191 the Court of Appeal made observations about the need to keep applications about jurisdiction in proportion.  “… hearings concerning the issue of appropriate forum should…

APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE PROPOSED RESPONDENT CAN HAVE THEIR SAY

APPLICATIONS FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: THE PROPOSED RESPONDENT CAN HAVE THEIR SAY

February 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

An interesting point arose in the Court of Appeal decision today in Carr v Panel Products (Kimpton) Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 190.  When a party seeks permission to appeal from the trial judge – can the other party make submissions in…

THE PROBLEM IN OBTAINING AN ORDER YOU HAVEN'T ASKED FOR:AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 3.4 WILL NOT BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION UNDER PART 24

THE PROBLEM IN OBTAINING AN ORDER YOU HAVEN’T ASKED FOR:AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 3.4 WILL NOT BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION UNDER PART 24

January 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

The judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Saeed & Anor v Ibrahim & Ors [2018] EWHC 3 (Ch) contains several important observations in relation to making applications.  The Master refused to treat an application, ostensibly made under CPR 3.4, as an…

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT ALLOWED: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL - THE FULL JUDGMENT

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT ALLOWED: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL – THE FULL JUDGMENT

January 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content

I reported the judgment in Cross-v- Black Bull (Doncaster) Limited* (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2017) at the end of last year.  The full judgment is now available and is attached here 072 – Cross v Black Bull – Judgment A SUMMARY The…

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2017 (I):  "SURVIVING THE EMOTIONS OF LITIGATION" & "THINGS THAT IRRITATE JUDGES"

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2017 (I): “SURVIVING THE EMOTIONS OF LITIGATION” & “THINGS THAT IRRITATE JUDGES”

December 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Review

This is the fourth annual review on this blog. This year I have decided to break it into a number of reviews.  First it is interesting to look at what is being read on this site and the search terms…

CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: MCGANN -V- BISPING: ROUND 3: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND "IMPLICIT" ORDERS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: MCGANN -V- BISPING: ROUND 3: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND “IMPLICIT” ORDERS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

December 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

We have already looked twice at the “sparring” arguments in relation to procedure in the case of  McGann v Bisping [2017] EWHC 2951 (Comm). A further procedural issue arose as to whether a party was debarred from calling evidence at all. The…

AFTER THE EVENT INSURANCE DOES NOT PROHIBIT AN ORDER FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS

AFTER THE EVENT INSURANCE DOES NOT PROHIBIT AN ORDER FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS

November 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Security for Costs

In  Premier Motorauctions Ltd & Anor v Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 1872 the Court of Appeal decided that the existence of an after the event insurance policy to cover legal expenses did not prohibit a court from ordering…

SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?

SUING THE WRONG DEFENDANT? SHOULD HAVE GONE TO SPECSAVERS?

November 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Parties to actions

It is always embarrassing to find out you are suing the wrong defendant and have to apply for substitution (although we have looked at cases in which the wrong claimant has issued proceedings).  This issue was considered by Mr Justice…

← Previous 1 … 21 22 23 24 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • SUPERVISION FOR LAWYERS: USEFUL LINKS: “REMEMBER THAT SUPERVISION HAS NUMEROUS BENEFITS”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THINGS THAT LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: (JUNE 2016) (A SPOILER – SCOWLING AND POUTING WHILE THE JUDGE GIVES THEIR DECISION DOESN’T GO DOWN TOO WELL)
  • DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGES SHOULD BE CAREFUL WHO IS GIVEN THE TASK OF TRYING COMPLEX TRIALS: COURT OF APPEAL MISSIVE TO DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGES (& MANY OTHERS…)
  • PROVING THINGS 291: WHAT WEIGHT DOES A JUDGE GIVE TO WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL AND (THE JUDGE FINDS) THERE IS NO GOOD REASON FOR THIS?
  • SERVICE POINTS 47: THE CASE ABOUT THE SECRETARY OF STATE AND THE UNSEALED CLAIM FORM: A RARE EXAMPLE OF “DENTON” PRINCIPLES APPLYING IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.