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 6
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS

February 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in some detail.  The judgment provides a useful reminder of some basic principles. Firstly that a litigant seeking relief from sanctions cannot complain about the original…

HIGH COURT TACKLES SOME DIFFICULT PROCEDURAL ISSUES (1): IS A PREVIOUS BREACH NECESSARY FOR A PEREMPTORY ORDER TO BE MADE

HIGH COURT TACKLES SOME DIFFICULT PROCEDURAL ISSUES (1): IS A PREVIOUS BREACH NECESSARY FOR A PEREMPTORY ORDER TO BE MADE

February 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders

We are looking at judgment that is, essentially, all about procedural compliance and the court’s approach to making “unless orders”.  The approach of the appellate court to case management decisions could be added to that list.  It is a detailed…

HIGH COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE FOLLOWING AN APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE : THIS IS A REHEARING IN FULL - THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TO SHOW AN ERROR SUCH AS TO WARRANT SETTING ASIDE THE ORIGINAL ORDER

HIGH COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE FOLLOWING AN APPLICATION WITHOUT NOTICE : THIS IS A REHEARING IN FULL – THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE TO SHOW AN ERROR SUCH AS TO WARRANT SETTING ASIDE THE ORIGINAL ORDER

February 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at a case where the court set aside an order made without notice. The Master found that the evidence presented to him at the initial hearing was “neither full nor frank”.  It is a reminder of the…

COST BITES 341: THIS ASSESSMENT SHOULD NOT LAST 50 DAYS: COURT OF APPEAL ADVOCATES "SAMPLING" APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT OF £44 MILLION  BILL OF COSTS

COST BITES 341: THIS ASSESSMENT SHOULD NOT LAST 50 DAYS: COURT OF APPEAL ADVOCATES “SAMPLING” APPROACH TO ASSESSMENT OF £44 MILLION BILL OF COSTS

February 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

It is rare for a court, particularly the Court of Appeal, to take one step aside from the issue being determined and make some general observations on the process of the assessment of costs.  This is one of those rare…

MAZUR MATTERS 49: NEWS FROM CILEX ON LITIGATION PRACTICE RIGHTS: THERE MAY BE A SLIGHT CHANGE OF STANCE BY CILEX

MAZUR MATTERS 49: NEWS FROM CILEX ON LITIGATION PRACTICE RIGHTS: THERE MAY BE A SLIGHT CHANGE OF STANCE BY CILEX

February 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

One matter I continue to celebrate is when CILEx members announce that they have been granted Litigation Rights. I know that there are major questions as to whether they are necessary. However in the interim it is most probably prudent…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: APPLYING TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET: WHAT YOU NEED TO SHOW

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: APPLYING TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET: WHAT YOU NEED TO SHOW

February 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

What does an applicant need to show if it wants to persuade the court to vary an existing costs budget? There was a helpful summary of the principles set out in a case we looked at last week. An application…

YOU HAVE TO PAY THE FULL COURT FEE: THE FACT THAT A COURT HAS ACCEPTED A FEE DOES NOT RENDER IT "FUNCTUS OFFICIO"

YOU HAVE TO PAY THE FULL COURT FEE: THE FACT THAT A COURT HAS ACCEPTED A FEE DOES NOT RENDER IT “FUNCTUS OFFICIO”

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

Here we have an ingenious argument that a court could not claim a higher court fee. It was an ingenious argument that failed.  This shows the importance of claimants knowing the value of a case when they issued, and the…

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS NOT SIGNED BY AN AUTHORISED PERSON:  IT REQUIRES "FACTS" NOT INFORMATION: A SOLICITOR EMPLOYEE SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED IN THE NAME OF THE FIRM

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS NOT SIGNED BY AN AUTHORISED PERSON: IT REQUIRES “FACTS” NOT INFORMATION: A SOLICITOR EMPLOYEE SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED IN THE NAME OF THE FIRM

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

Here we have an example of a Statement of Truth that was non-compliant it contained the wrong wording and was signed by the wrong person in the wrong way.   It shows the need to ensure that the rules in relation…

MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR'S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS "NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION"

MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR’S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS “NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION”

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The snappily titled “Interim Report: Regulatory review of advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies”  from the Legal Services Board is five pages long (including one page spent on…

PART 36 IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS: WHAT PRACTITIONERS NEED TO KNOW: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2.00 pm (THREE TRACTORS, TWO FIELDS AND FAILING TO BEAT AN OFFER BY A "WHISKER")

PART 36 IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS: WHAT PRACTITIONERS NEED TO KNOW: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2.00 pm (THREE TRACTORS, TWO FIELDS AND FAILING TO BEAT AN OFFER BY A “WHISKER”)

January 29, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36, Webinar

The past 12 months have seen some important cases about Part 36. Every civil litigator needs to keep up to date with these developments. This webinar looks at the cases and considers the practical implications for litigators. DATE AND TIME…

COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR'S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION

COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR’S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION

January 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There are many lessons to learn from this case: (i) the nature, extent and power of the Legal Ombudsman; (ii) the importance of transparency and accuracy when giving an estimate as to fees, particularly in litigation (iii) the very limited…

IT IS NOT THE JUDGE'S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED

IT IS NOT THE JUDGE’S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED

January 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

There are a remarkable number of cases about penal notices.  Questions such as “are they part of the court order?”; “are the essential for committal proceedings to be brought?” “when should they be added and who should add them” arise…

COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE "SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES" UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT

COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES” UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

A client has a limited amount of time to challenge a solicitor’s bill.   If the bill is challenged 12 months after delivery or payment then the power to order assessment can only be exercised if the court accepts that there…

MAZUR MATTERS 47: MAZUR CITED IN SUBMISSIONS FOR APPLICATION TO ADJOURN: "THIS IS NOT RELEVANT"

MAZUR MATTERS 47: MAZUR CITED IN SUBMISSIONS FOR APPLICATION TO ADJOURN: “THIS IS NOT RELEVANT”

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Mazur has not featured in many reported cases.  However it is mentioned in passing here. For the sake of completeness of the series I have included it.  It is (I suspect not the first) where it appears to have been…

COST BITES 336: MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT "SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS" AND DO NOT JUSTIFY A VARIATION IN THE BUDGET: THE JUDGE NOT PERSUADED ON THE USE OF LEADING COUNSEL, NEW SOLICITORS WITH HIGHER HOURLY RATES AND THINGS MISSED FROM THE FIRST BUDGET

COST BITES 336: MOST OF THESE THINGS ARE NOT “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS” AND DO NOT JUSTIFY A VARIATION IN THE BUDGET: THE JUDGE NOT PERSUADED ON THE USE OF LEADING COUNSEL, NEW SOLICITORS WITH HIGHER HOURLY RATES AND THINGS MISSED FROM THE FIRST BUDGET

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Here we have a detailed analysis of a defendant’s application to vary (that is more than double) its original costs budget.  At the PTR stage the defendant applied to double its costs budget, some of this was allowed, most was…

PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF "21 DAYS" ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES...

PART 36: DOES A JUDICIAL READING DAY COUNT IN THE CALCULATION OF “21 DAYS” ? WHAT A DIFFERENCE A (READING) DAY MAKES…

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We have seen numerous cases on this blog where matters have been left the “last minute” and the rules as to the calculation of time become important.  Here we have an interesting example in relation to Part 36.  An offer…

COST BITES 335: DID FIXED COSTS APPLY? THE EXCEPTIONS, THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND THE EFFECT OF PART 36 CONSIDERED

COST BITES 335: DID FIXED COSTS APPLY? THE EXCEPTIONS, THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS AND THE EFFECT OF PART 36 CONSIDERED

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Aofie Murphy from Brabners for sending me a copy of this judgment this morning. It relates to fixed costs (i) the exceptions; (ii) the transitional provisions; (iii) whether a Part 36 offer displaced them.  It has…

THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR - CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE

THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR – CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

Here we are looking at a case that bristles with issues both in relation to solicitor and own client costs, but also in relation to civil procedure and compliance with court orders. It serves as a reminder that a client…

COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE PART IN THE HEARING SO WHY SHOULD THE APPLICATION BE GRANTED?

January 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This case illustrates an important point about procedure in Part 8 proceedings. In particular the fact that a defendant who fails to acknowledge service has no right to be heard at any subsequent hearing.  Here the defendant’s application for an…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 51: TOO LATE TO AMEND A REPLY WHICH WAS INADEQUATELY PARTICULARISED IN ANY EVENT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 51: TOO LATE TO AMEND A REPLY WHICH WAS INADEQUATELY PARTICULARISED IN ANY EVENT

January 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Statements of Case

There has been a recent flurry in cases about late amendment and also about Replies. Both issues are considered her. The claimant applied to amend its Reply five weeks before trial. The revised Reply attempted to put forward a “counterfactual”…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 50: A CHANGE OF COUNSEL IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO PERMIT AMENDED PLEADINGS(AKA WHY FAMILY LAWYERS NEED TO READ THIS SERIES...)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 50: A CHANGE OF COUNSEL IS NOT A GOOD REASON TO PERMIT AMENDED PLEADINGS(AKA WHY FAMILY LAWYERS NEED TO READ THIS SERIES…)

January 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

I cannot recall dealing with a case in this series which involved the Family Courts. However we have a detailed exposition and consideration of the relevant principles relating to late amendment here. One factor is the absence of a good…

COST BITES 333: REMEMBER THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT DETAILED ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE AT THE END OF PROCEEDINGS, NOT AFTER THE TRIAL OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE

COST BITES 333: REMEMBER THE GENERAL RULE IS THAT DETAILED ASSESSMENT TAKES PLACE AT THE END OF PROCEEDINGS, NOT AFTER THE TRIAL OF A PRELIMINARY ISSUE

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

We are returning to a point that can easily be overlooked by a party that has been successful at a split trial or a trial of a preliminary issue. Although the court may make an order in that party’s favour,…

COST BITES 332 : COURT MAKES AN ORDER FOR  INTERIM PAYMENT OF COSTS OF £43 MILLION - AND THIS IS AFTER TAKING A "CAUTIOUS APPROACH" TO THE CLAIMANTS' EVIDENCE

COST BITES 332 : COURT MAKES AN ORDER FOR INTERIM PAYMENT OF COSTS OF £43 MILLION – AND THIS IS AFTER TAKING A “CAUTIOUS APPROACH” TO THE CLAIMANTS’ EVIDENCE

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interim Payments, Members Content

This judgment given today contains a number of important points in relation to costs. The headline point is obviously an interim award of £43 million was made. This was actually less than 50% of the sum being sought.  One of…

COST BITES 331: SOLICITOR FAILS TO SHOW THEY WERE OWED £573,529 IN COSTS: NEITHER A LIEN OR THE LEGAL AID CHARGE NECESSARILY GIVES RISE TO A DEBT FROM THE CLIENT

COST BITES 331: SOLICITOR FAILS TO SHOW THEY WERE OWED £573,529 IN COSTS: NEITHER A LIEN OR THE LEGAL AID CHARGE NECESSARILY GIVES RISE TO A DEBT FROM THE CLIENT

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This is an unusual case where a third party challenged a solicitor’s right to be a creditor in an insolvency arrangement. The third party argued  that the sums claimed by the solicitors were not in fact recoverable from the respondent. …

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER...)

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER…)

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The first time I wrote on this topic many practitioners expressed surprise that I had written something so very “basic”.  Some readers were incredulous. However, as we see below, others shared their experiences.  This rule is not known, or not…

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE?  PLUS - THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS...

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE? PLUS – THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS…

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Earlier posts have shown that the claimant was successful on two of the key issues in relation to the appeal.  However litigation can be cruel. A litigant can win on many issues but still lose the case. So it is…

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 2: WAS AN OFFER ON LIABILITY EFFECTIVE IN THIS CONTEXT?

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 2: WAS AN OFFER ON LIABILITY EFFECTIVE IN THIS CONTEXT?

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We continue with the detailed examination of the Court of Appeal decision on Part 36 this morning.  This aspect of the case is particularly important because, again, although the claimant lost the appeal he won on this particular issue. That…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ALWAYS WAS (AND REMAINS) A RISKY BUSINESS

THROWBACK FRIDAY: EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ALWAYS WAS (AND REMAINS) A RISKY BUSINESS

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This week we go back to January 2016. It is a post about the dangers of applying for extensions of time to serve the claim form.  The points made a decade ago remain equally valid today. We saw several cases…

COST BITES 329: THE COURT'S APPROACH TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON COSTS THAT ARISE FROM APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR "OVERSPENDS" - COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

COST BITES 329: THE COURT’S APPROACH TO INTERIM PAYMENTS ON COSTS THAT ARISE FROM APPLICATIONS AND CLAIMS FOR “OVERSPENDS” – COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content

Some of the basic principles upon which the courts make orders for interim payments are well established, particularly when the case has been budgeted.  This case considers the appropriate approach when there is a claim for costs arising from interlocutory…

COST BITES 328: A CAREFULLY NUANCED DECISION ABOUT LIABILITY FOR COSTS, INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS, INCLUDING COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

COST BITES 328: A CAREFULLY NUANCED DECISION ABOUT LIABILITY FOR COSTS, INTERIM PAYMENTS FOR COSTS, INCLUDING COSTS OUTSIDE THE BUDGET

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The question of “who won” is usually the starting point of assessing liability to pay costs.  Complications arise when one party “won a bit”  but not all it was seeking. We have a detailed consideration of these issues here. (Whether…

COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED "AGGRESSIVELY" - COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED

COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED “AGGRESSIVELY” – COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we have the defendant making a justified, and successful, application to strike out a Reply. However the judge was unhappy with the manner in which the application (and the litigation generally) was being conduced (by both sides). He found…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 49: THE COURT STRIKES OUT TWO HUNDRED PARAGRAPHS OF A REPLY

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 49: THE COURT STRIKES OUT TWO HUNDRED PARAGRAPHS OF A REPLY

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

We are looking at a case that has many procedural points of interest to litigators.  We are starting by looking at the judge’s observations on the claimants’ Reply which was described as “Defective” and large parts struck out.  There are…

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: "THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH"

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: “THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH”

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we see another litigant coming to grief because of a failure to file a costs budget on time.  The litigant had been warned of the consequences and the judge found that there was no good reason for the breach. …

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: WEBINAR 23rd JANUARY 2025: HOW TO AVOID "DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH"

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: WEBINAR 23rd JANUARY 2025: HOW TO AVOID “DICING WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH”

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Readers of this blog know that issues relating to service of the claim form are a regular feature of the blog.  There were numerous posts last year. There are likely to be issues throughout 2026.  This webinar is designed to…

PROVIDING LEGAL SUBMISSIONS WITH INACCURATE CASE SUMMARIES: THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO WOULD "NEITHER CONFIRM OR DENY" THAT AI WAS USED

PROVIDING LEGAL SUBMISSIONS WITH INACCURATE CASE SUMMARIES: THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO WOULD “NEITHER CONFIRM OR DENY” THAT AI WAS USED

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

We are returning to the vexed issue of the (mis) use of Artificial Intelligence when providing written submissions to the court (in the case the First Tier Tribunal).  The judge found that summaries provided were inaccurate.    The judgment points…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR THIRD PARTIES AT COURT: NO NOTICE NECESSARY...

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR THIRD PARTIES AT COURT: NO NOTICE NECESSARY…

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Is a third party, with no relationship to the case, entitled to see the witness statements being used in the hearing? That is the issue considered in this case which, unusually, was an application for judicial review of a County…

CLAIMS AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEATHS ARISING FROM COVID WERE STRUCK OUT: CAUSATION COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED

CLAIMS AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEATHS ARISING FROM COVID WERE STRUCK OUT: CAUSATION COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

In this case, decided yesterday,  the court struck out the claimants’ case alleging that deaths were caused by, or materially contributed to, by the negligence of the defendant. The court had the important caveats in relation to the striking out…

COST BITES 326: DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL IN  OBTAINING A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER: FARES FAIR IN THE BUS STATION CASE...

COST BITES 326: DEFENDANT SUCCESSFUL IN OBTAINING A NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER: FARES FAIR IN THE BUS STATION CASE…

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This judgment today is an interesting illustration of the fact that those providing support to a party can find themselves the subject of a non-party costs order. In this case the claimant company was in liquidation. The respondents to the…

AN APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE:  THIS IS NOT A "FISHING EXPEDITION" AND IT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO MAKE AN ORDER

AN APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: THIS IS NOT A “FISHING EXPEDITION” AND IT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO MAKE AN ORDER

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

It is rare to see a fully reasoned judgment from the High Court in relation to an application for pre-action disclosure.  Here we have a case where the rules and principles were considered an applied.  There are some important lessons…

ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE ISSUES OF OWNERSHIP WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE SAME ARGUMENT RAN TWICE (UNSUCCESSFULLY ON BOTH OCCASIONS...)

ASKING THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE ISSUES OF OWNERSHIP WAS NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE SAME ARGUMENT RAN TWICE (UNSUCCESSFULLY ON BOTH OCCASIONS…)

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we consider an argument that it was an abuse of process for a litigant to argue issues that were directly related to another action between the parties that had been stayed.  The judge held that this was not an…

WAS THIS "SECOND" ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

WAS THIS “SECOND” ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

January 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

When a party is dissatisfied with the result of a hearing and has exhausted the appeal process there is often little they can do.  One potential remedy is to bring a second action seeking to set aside the first on…

MAZUR MATTERS 46: A "CLAIMANT'S REPRESENTATIVE" HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE IN THIS SMALL CLAIMS TRIAL:  "IT IS TO DISTORT THE PURPOSE OF SCH 3, PARA 7 BEYOND RECOGNITION THAT THE TRADITIONAL ROLE OF AN INHOUSE MANAGING CLERK UNDERTAKING THE ROUTINE WORK OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE BE EXTENDED INTO A WHOLESALE UNQUALIFIED ADVOCACY SCHEME"

MAZUR MATTERS 46: A “CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE” HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE IN THIS SMALL CLAIMS TRIAL: “IT IS TO DISTORT THE PURPOSE OF SCH 3, PARA 7 BEYOND RECOGNITION THAT THE TRADITIONAL ROLE OF AN INHOUSE MANAGING CLERK UNDERTAKING THE ROUTINE WORK OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE BE EXTENDED INTO A WHOLESALE UNQUALIFIED ADVOCACY SCHEME”

January 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the first time I have seen Mazur mentioned and considered  in an issue as to rights of audience. In this case the judge held that the representative sent by the claimant to attend a small claims trial did…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 46:  THE DEFENDANT HAD AGREED THAT THE DEFENCE AS DRAFTED BROKE THE RULES

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 46: THE DEFENDANT HAD AGREED THAT THE DEFENCE AS DRAFTED BROKE THE RULES

January 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

We are looking at a case where we get a hint of a defence that was so defective that, ultimately, the defendant agreed it should be struck out and entirely repleaded.  It provides an object lesson on how a defence…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS: LOOKING BACK TO JANUARY 2016

THROWBACK FRIDAY: APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS: LOOKING BACK TO JANUARY 2016

January 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

This blog celebrates its 13th birthday later this year.  Civil Litigation Brief started as a series in the Solicitors Journal 35 years ago. Needless to say it has a large “back catalogue”.  I wanted a regular opportunity to bring important…

WHEN CAN A JUDGE ADD ADDITIONAL MATERIAL TO A JUDGMENT AFTER HANDING DOWN? COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERED THE ISSUE

WHEN CAN A JUDGE ADD ADDITIONAL MATERIAL TO A JUDGMENT AFTER HANDING DOWN? COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERED THE ISSUE

January 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we are looking at an old case. However it has only recently arrived on BAILII and deals with an issue that remains relevant today. The Court of Appeal considered the issue of when is it appropriate for a judge…

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL BEING REFUSED: A GOOD REASON FOR EXPEDITION HAS TO BE SHOWN

ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF AN APPLICATION FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL BEING REFUSED: A GOOD REASON FOR EXPEDITION HAS TO BE SHOWN

January 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

As promised we are looking at a second case where an expedited hearing was refused.  The judge here went through the principles relating to expedition and found that good reasons had not been made out.   The judge also rejected an…

COST BITES 324: THE TIME FOR ASSESSING COSTS IS NOW - WHO KNOWS WHAT WILL HAPPEN LATER

COST BITES 324: THE TIME FOR ASSESSING COSTS IS NOW – WHO KNOWS WHAT WILL HAPPEN LATER

January 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at an argument by a paying party that costs payable at an application should be reduced because the work would be required to be done at a later stage in any event. (The judge has no…

WHEN THE COURT REFUSES AN APPLICATION FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL: THERE IS NO POINT IN LABOURING THE ISSUE...

WHEN THE COURT REFUSES AN APPLICATION FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL: THERE IS NO POINT IN LABOURING THE ISSUE…

January 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This is the first of two cases  today where we look at examples where the courts have refused to grant an order for an expedited trial.   This case was an unusual one, the judge reviewed the established principles and found…

COST BITES 323: HOURLY RATES: THIS CASE DOES NOT FALL INTO LONDON BAND 1: IT CERTAINLY DOES NOT JUSTIFY FEES ABOVE THAT RATE...

COST BITES 323: HOURLY RATES: THIS CASE DOES NOT FALL INTO LONDON BAND 1: IT CERTAINLY DOES NOT JUSTIFY FEES ABOVE THAT RATE…

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are returning to the issue of hourly rates.  In this case the receiving party sought hourly rates that were above the London 1 band.   The judge held that the case did not fall within that band and certainly did…

PROVING THINGS 275: IF YOU CAN'T PROVE YOU SUFFERED A LOSS THEN YOU HAVE NO CLAIM: ACTION AGAINST SOLICITORS DISMISSED: THE PARABLE OF THE MOUNTAINEER'S KNEE

PROVING THINGS 275: IF YOU CAN’T PROVE YOU SUFFERED A LOSS THEN YOU HAVE NO CLAIM: ACTION AGAINST SOLICITORS DISMISSED: THE PARABLE OF THE MOUNTAINEER’S KNEE

January 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

Here we have an interesting case about the alleged professional negligence of solicitors.  The case did not get very far, being struck out at first instance and with that decision upheld by the Court of  Appeal. Put simply the claimants…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 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

  • A PARTY CANNOT ADVANCE ONE CASE IN ONE SET OF PROCEEDINGS AND THE OPPOSITE CASE IN ANOTHER: ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT LEADS TO A COUNTERCLAIM BEING STRUCK OUT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • COST BITES 426: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK SHOULD PAY COSTS AFTER DISCONTINUING: “THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK IS DESIGNED TO BE DIFFERENT”
  • COST BITES 425: THE EAT OVERTURNS AN ORDER “ASSESSING” COSTS: THE ET APPLIED THE WRONG TEST IN RELATION TO THE CLAIANT’S MEANS, AND THEN FAILED TO SHOW IT HAD ASSESSED THE COSTS SCHEDULE AT ALL..
  • SHOULD UNDUE DELAY AND “GROVIT” ABUSE LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT UNLESS THERE ARE COMPELLING REASONS NO TO DO SO? THE COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDER THE ISSUES
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT DOCUMENTS NEED TO BE IN AN APPEAL BUNDLE? A JUDGMENT ON THAT VERY POINT:”DOCUMENTS GENUINELY REQUIRED FOR DETERMINATION OF THE APPEAL”

Top Posts

COST BITES 419: HOW CLAIMING COUNSEL'S FEES ON AN N260 CAN LEAD TO REFERRAL TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT PROCEEDINGS TO BE CONSIDERED: SIGNATORY BEWARE
COST BITES 423: THE JUDGE'S EYEBROWS ARE RAISED AT AN ADDITIONAL £2,500 BECAUSE THE KC HAS TO STAY FOR THE AFTERNOON...
COST BITES 421 : THE AMY WINEHOUSE CASE IS BACK IN COURT: CLAIMANT'S AGGRESSIVE CONDUCT OF A CASE WHERE HE LOST "ON EVERY MATERIAL POINT OF FACT AND LAW" LEADS TO AN ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS
MAZUR MATTERS 66: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD FINAL REPORT ON MAZUR: "REGULATORY REVIEW OF ADVICE AND GUIDANCE PROVIDED TO THE PROFESSION ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGAITON BY APPROVED REGULATORS AND REGULATORY BODIES"
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN COURT: AN INTERESTING PRACTICE DIRECTION FROM THE HIGH COURT IN IRELAND : GOOD ADVICE FOR US ALL

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.