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 7
COST BITES 303:  THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE RESPONDENTS' ARGUMENTS ABOUT FAILURES OF PROCEDURE WERE NOT "NIT PICKING": RATHER THEY SHOWED THAT THE APPLICATION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY BROUGHT AND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED...

THE RESPONDENTS’ ARGUMENTS ABOUT FAILURES OF PROCEDURE WERE NOT “NIT PICKING”: RATHER THEY SHOWED THAT THE APPLICATION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY BROUGHT AND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED…

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

There are often major differences of view as to the effect of non-compliance with the rules. We have such differences here.  The claimants, in default, regarded the respondents’ procedural objections as “nit-picking”. The judge, however, held that the default was…

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Part 36

We are looking again at the case in which the claimant applied for permission to withdraw their Part 36 offer.  The claimant had capacity, however at the hearing it was argued that he came within the definition of “vulnerable” litigant…

WHEN A RESPONDENT'S NOTICE IS REALLY A CROSS-APPEAL: SHOULD THE COURT GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ALLOW THE "APPEAL" TO BE ARGUED?

WHEN A RESPONDENT’S NOTICE IS REALLY A CROSS-APPEAL: SHOULD THE COURT GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ALLOW THE “APPEAL” TO BE ARGUED?

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Sometimes a respondent’s notice is really a cross-appeal attempting to disguise itself.  We are looking at such a case here.   The “respondent’s notice” was served late, and permission was given to serve it. However on closer examination at the appeal…

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (2): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (2): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We continue with the consideration of the recent case in which a claimant applied for permission to withdraw a Part 36 offer.  The judge also considered the relevant rules and case law in detail. (You need the court’s permission to…

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? IS A "CHANGE OF MIND" A "CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES": THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? IS A “CHANGE OF MIND” A “CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES”: THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

October 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Part 36

There are few cases which involve a claimant seeking to withdraw their own Part 36 offer we have a decision today here.  The claimant made an offer and attempted to withdraw is shortly afterwards. The defendant accepted the offer within…

SERVICE POINTS 15: THE CLAIM FORM CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (2): LEAVING A CLAIM FORM OUT FOR THE DX TO COLLECT WAS NOT EFFECTIVE SERVICE

SERVICE POINTS 15: THE CLAIM FORM CASE IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (2): LEAVING A CLAIM FORM OUT FOR THE DX TO COLLECT WAS NOT EFFECTIVE SERVICE

October 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The Court of Appeal has been busy recently with issues relating to service of the claim form. On the whole claimants (or rather their representatives) have not fared well.  Here we look at the claimant’s argument that leaving a claim…

WHEN A SOLICITOR SIGNS THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH FOR A COMPANY: THE COURT CAN ORDER THAT THE COMPANY DELIVERS UP DETAILS OF WHICH INDIVIDUAL GAVE INFORMATION

WHEN A SOLICITOR SIGNS THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH FOR A COMPANY: THE COURT CAN ORDER THAT THE COMPANY DELIVERS UP DETAILS OF WHICH INDIVIDUAL GAVE INFORMATION

October 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

It is not uncommon for the solicitor to sign a statement of truth on behalf of a company or corporation.  This case considers the question of whether  the company can be compelled to give details of the individuals who gave…

SHOULD COSTS BE DISAPPLIED IN A "MIXED" CASE WHERE PART OF A CLAIM HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT? A DECISION ON APPEAL

SHOULD COSTS BE DISAPPLIED IN A “MIXED” CASE WHERE PART OF A CLAIM HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT? A DECISION ON APPEAL

October 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

What order  for costs should the court make in a “mixed” claim when part of the claim is struck out but a personal injury claim continues. That was the question considered in the appeal we are looking at here. In…

"PLEADINGS AND EVIDENCE SERVE QUITE DIFFERENT PURPOSES": THE NEED FOR CLAIMANTS TO PLEAD THEIR CASE WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION

“PLEADINGS AND EVIDENCE SERVE QUITE DIFFERENT PURPOSES”: THE NEED FOR CLAIMANTS TO PLEAD THEIR CASE WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION

October 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content, Statements of Case

We are looking at a case that deals with two issues: (i) the practice of seeking an injunction without having first issued proceedings; (ii) the desirability of a party seeking an injunction to put a fully pleaded case before the…

GIVING ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES: ANOTHER REMINDER OF THEIR IMPORTANCE: "PARTIES MUST BE REALISTIC AND GIVE EARLY AND ACCURATE ASSESSMENTS"

GIVING ACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES: ANOTHER REMINDER OF THEIR IMPORTANCE: “PARTIES MUST BE REALISTIC AND GIVE EARLY AND ACCURATE ASSESSMENTS”

October 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This is not the first time this blog has looked at judicial criticisms of inadequate time estimates.  On this occasion it was in relation to unrealistic reading time.   This provides an opportunity to revisit the guidance given in relation to…

COST BITES 296: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS APPELLANTS' APPLICATION FOR A COSTS CAP: CAN THE LITIGATING TENANTS  PUSH THE COSTS RISKS ONTO THE NON-LITIGANTS?

COST BITES 296: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS APPELLANTS’ APPLICATION FOR A COSTS CAP: CAN THE LITIGATING TENANTS PUSH THE COSTS RISKS ONTO THE NON-LITIGANTS?

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at a Court of Appeal decision in relation to the costs capping on an appeal. It was common ground that the Court had the power to order a costs cap if so minded.  However the practical…

MAZUR MATTERS 20:  TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION? PLUS A SNIPPET OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE

MAZUR MATTERS 20: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION? PLUS A SNIPPET OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Useful links

I am continuing with the Mazur series by looking at two more useful links from reputable sources.  One, from the Bar Standards Board,  on what is not the conduct of litigation the other the Law Society Practice Note on these…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 32: CLOSING SUBMISSIONS ARE NO PLACE TO TAKE A POINT THAT HAS NEVER BEEN PLEADED AT ALL

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 32: CLOSING SUBMISSIONS ARE NO PLACE TO TAKE A POINT THAT HAS NEVER BEEN PLEADED AT ALL

October 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we are looking at a case where there were manifold issues (“100s of allegations) and where evidence was given over several weeks.  However the claimant attempted to raise a new, unpleaded, issue during closing submissions.  As we shall see…

MAZUR MATTERS 19: TWO USEFUL LINKS: THIS HAS CHANGED THE PROFESSION'S UNDERSTANDING NOT THE LAW: STEPS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE

MAZUR MATTERS 19: TWO USEFUL LINKS: THIS HAS CHANGED THE PROFESSION’S UNDERSTANDING NOT THE LAW: STEPS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE

October 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am attempting to avoid the blog being solely about Mazur. However the fact is that the Mazur issues are the most widely read posts, many of the more mainstream issues having taken a backseat.   Whilst there is some commentary…

PART 36 CASE OF THE DAY (2): SHOULD THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF A FAILURE TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER APPLY? INTERESTING ISSUES OR ISSUES ON INTEREST?

PART 36 CASE OF THE DAY (2): SHOULD THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF A FAILURE TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER APPLY? INTERESTING ISSUES OR ISSUES ON INTEREST?

October 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We continue looking at a High Court decision with some interesting issues in relation to the making of Part 36 offers and the consequences for a party if the offer is not beaten.  Here we look at the court’s considerations…

PART 36 CASE OF THE DAY (1): WAS THE OFFER A VALID OFFER? TWO FIELDS, THREE TRACTORS AND £20,000 CAUSED A FURROW IN THE DEFENDANT'S BROWS

PART 36 CASE OF THE DAY (1): WAS THE OFFER A VALID OFFER? TWO FIELDS, THREE TRACTORS AND £20,000 CAUSED A FURROW IN THE DEFENDANT’S BROWS

October 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we are looking at an argument as to whether a Part 36 offer, slightly unusual in form, was a valid Part 36 offer.  Later posts will examine many of the other issues relating to costs that were considered in…

MAZUR MATTERS 17: WHAT ABOUT COST LAWYERS?  RE-VISITING OLD GROUND: A CASE THAT MAKES USEFUL READING

MAZUR MATTERS 17: WHAT ABOUT COST LAWYERS? RE-VISITING OLD GROUND: A CASE THAT MAKES USEFUL READING

October 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There are a number of issues that have come up in relation to the impact of the Mazur decision.  One of those relates to the activities of cost lawyers.  The case law and principles relating to this were considered in…

MAZUR MATTERS 15: COULD BREACHES OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT? WHY YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ

MAZUR MATTERS 15: COULD BREACHES OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT? WHY YOU SHOULDN’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ

October 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I have gently, perhaps too gently, suggested that a great deal of what is being written and said about the impact of Mazur is “unhelpful”.  Put more bluntly some of it is inaccurate and misleading.  There is much “wishful thinking”…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 4: THE DANGERS OF PLEADING ALLEGATIONS OF NEGLIGENCE WITHOUT APPROPRIATE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT (LESSONS HERE FOR ALL LITIGATORS)

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 4: THE DANGERS OF PLEADING ALLEGATIONS OF NEGLIGENCE WITHOUT APPROPRIATE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT (LESSONS HERE FOR ALL LITIGATORS)

October 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Statements of Case, Wasted Costs

There have been several cases dealing with inadequate pleading in clinical negligence cases this year. Here we look at one of them.  It is a case we have looked at already but I wanted to emphasise the point.  Further this…

EXPERT WATCH 18: CLAIMANT NOT ENTITLED TO SIGHT OF DEFENDANT'S DRAFT REPORT - REFERRED TO IN DEFENCE AND THE REPORT OF ANOTHER EXPERT

EXPERT WATCH 18: CLAIMANT NOT ENTITLED TO SIGHT OF DEFENDANT’S DRAFT REPORT – REFERRED TO IN DEFENCE AND THE REPORT OF ANOTHER EXPERT

October 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Here we look at a claimant’s applications under CPR 31.14(1) and 35.10 to have sight of a draft expert report that the defendant had referred to in a defence and in the report of another expert.  The judgment contains a…

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: "THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT"

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: “THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT”

October 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is the most  serious criticism of surveillance operatives as I have seen.  The judge found that the operatives, filming on behalf of a defendant for the purpose of litigation,  had been “fundamental and repeated” errors. The operatives then put…

SERVICE POINTS 13: IS A CLAIMANT  SAVED BY THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE OR MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 11? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE A VIEW...

SERVICE POINTS 13: IS A CLAIMANT SAVED BY THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE OR MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 11? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE A VIEW…

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Over the years many claimants have been “rescued” by  a defendant’s failure to make a timely, or correct, application to dispute the jurisdiction when the claim form has been improperly served.   The limits of the defendant’s obligations were considered by…

SERVICE POINTS 12: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CPR 7.6 APPLIED AND NOT 3.9 (THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE GOOGLED THIS)

SERVICE POINTS 12: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CPR 7.6 APPLIED AND NOT 3.9 (THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE GOOGLED THIS)

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Here we look at another case where a claimant has come to grief because of a failure to serve the claim form.  The ingenious arguments that he should have relief from sanctions were successful at first instance, but were rejected…

MAZUR MATTERS 11: WHAT IS MEANT BY "THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" 2 (A) : WHEN SOMEBODY BREACHED THE ACT AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BY ARRANGING FOR THE SERVICE OF PLEADINGS

MAZUR MATTERS 11: WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 2 (A) : WHEN SOMEBODY BREACHED THE ACT AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BY ARRANGING FOR THE SERVICE OF PLEADINGS

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Comment on the implications  of the Mazur decision goes on unabated.  Some of this is informed commentary, some it is definitely not.  On this site we are going to continue the examination of the primary sources of assistance to litigators…

EXPERT WATCH 17: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION BY THE HIGH COURT OF WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE IS PERMITTED OR "REASONABLY REQUIRED": COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS VERY IMPORTANT HERE

EXPERT WATCH 17: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION BY THE HIGH COURT OF WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE IS PERMITTED OR “REASONABLY REQUIRED”: COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS VERY IMPORTANT HERE

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

It is rare for there to be a detailed consideration of the principles relating to whether expert evidence is necessary, admissible or desirable.   There is a detailed consideration of the principles here, combined with some clear observations on the necessity…

THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ALLOW A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION AGAINST THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS TO PROCEED TO STAGE 2: MUCH TO THINK ABOUT HERE FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS (AND INDEED ANYONE WHO DRAFTS PLEADINGS)

October 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Case, Wasted Costs

Here we are considering a case that covers issues relating to clinical negligence, the drafting of pleadings and wasted costs.  It gives much to think about, particularly for those bringing professional negligence actions. (Choose the right type of doctor before…

PART 36: SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION SO THAT THE NORMAL PART 36 PROVISIONS DO NOT APPLY? THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE "FORMIDABLE OBSTACLE"...

PART 36: SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION SO THAT THE NORMAL PART 36 PROVISIONS DO NOT APPLY? THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE “FORMIDABLE OBSTACLE”…

October 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we have a case where the court considered the defendant’s argument that the normal provisions of Part 36 should not apply when that defendant had failed to beat a claimant’s Part 36 offer.  The burden on a party arguing…

MAZUR MATTERS 8: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" (1): HOW HELPFUL ARE THE REGULATORS?

MAZUR MATTERS 8: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” (1): HOW HELPFUL ARE THE REGULATORS?

October 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct

This is the start of a new sub-series concentrating on one issue. We will be looking at what has become one of the key matters of concern for many litigators – what is meant by the “conduct of litigation”.   There…

MAZUR MATTERS 3: CILEX MEMBERS - THE REAL VICTIMS OF ALL THIS: WHAT CILEX MEMBERS CAN DO ABOUT THIS

MAZUR MATTERS 3: CILEX MEMBERS – THE REAL VICTIMS OF ALL THIS: WHAT CILEX MEMBERS CAN DO ABOUT THIS

October 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

If any members of the profession are entitled to be disgruntled (to put it mildly) about the decision in Mazur it is CILEX members who conduct litigation. They have hard earned qualifications and extensive experience. However, unless they come within…

COST BITES 294: "A DETAILED ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE FORUM TO RESCUE OR TO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE EFFECT OF A POORLY WORDED ORDER": THE COURT WOULD NOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF POTENTIAL FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTYOF THE PRIMARY ACTION ON ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 294: “A DETAILED ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE FORUM TO RESCUE OR TO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE EFFECT OF A POORLY WORDED ORDER”: THE COURT WOULD NOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF POTENTIAL FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTYOF THE PRIMARY ACTION ON ASSESSMENT

September 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Uncategorized

Here we are looking at an attempt by a paying party defendant to raise issues of conduct, including potential fundamental dishonesty, at the assessment of costs stage.  The defendant argued (or attempted to argue) that the costs judge should take…

MAZUR MATTERS 2: THE ROLE OF THE SOLICITORS REGULATORY AUTHORITY : THE REGULATOR THAT GOT THE LAW WRONG AND IS NOW "PONDERING" WHAT TO DO...

MAZUR MATTERS 2: THE ROLE OF THE SOLICITORS REGULATORY AUTHORITY : THE REGULATOR THAT GOT THE LAW WRONG AND IS NOW “PONDERING” WHAT TO DO…

September 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The webinar on Friday the 3rd October will deal with many of the major issues that arise from the the decision in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB).  One interesting aspect of the case is…

MAZUR MATTERS 1: THE PENALTIES FOR NON-QUALIFIED STAFF CONDUCTING LITIGATION (AKA "HOW MUCH TIME COULD I SERVE")

MAZUR MATTERS 1: THE PENALTIES FOR NON-QUALIFIED STAFF CONDUCTING LITIGATION (AKA “HOW MUCH TIME COULD I SERVE”)

September 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The webinar on Friday the 3rd October will deal with many of the major issues that arise from the the decision in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB). However it is clear that it…

WHEN CPR 3.10 CAN HELP: PROCEEDINGS HAD BEEN "ISSUED" ALBEIT IMPERFECTLY AND THE SITUATION COULD BE REMEDIED (TO THE CLAIMANT'S DETERIMENT IN THIS CASE)

WHEN CPR 3.10 CAN HELP: PROCEEDINGS HAD BEEN “ISSUED” ALBEIT IMPERFECTLY AND THE SITUATION COULD BE REMEDIED (TO THE CLAIMANT’S DETERIMENT IN THIS CASE)

September 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I have written before about the “heavy lifting” that sometimes takes place when practitioners attempt to invoke  CPR 3.10. Here we look at a case where CPR 3.10 was used to condemn a claimant who had used the wrong procedure…

SERVICE POINTS 11: A PARTY CANNOT SIMPLY MAKE UNILATERAL DECISIONS AS TO SERVICE WHICH OVERRIDE SPECIFIC COURT ORDERS

September 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

When a court makes an order as to the means of alternative service it expects the party in question to comply with that order. Here we have a case where the claimant decided on a different means of “serving” the…

WHEN A WITNESS COULD NOT SPEAK ENGLISH: A STATEMENT PREPARED SO BADLY THAT AN ADJOURNMENT WAS NECESSARY

September 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

It is fitting that on witness evidence Wednesday we are also  looking at a case where there was a wholesale failure to comply with the rules relating to evidence from those whose primary language is not English.  The breaches in…

AI USED IN THE WRITING OF A JUDICIAL DECISION:  READ ALL ABOUT IT...

AI USED IN THE WRITING OF A JUDICIAL DECISION: READ ALL ABOUT IT…

September 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There has been much discussion of the advantages, and disadvantages, in lawyers using AI. This is clearly going to be a major issue for the legal profession going forwarded.   Last week I reviewed Andrew Hogan’s book on this topic. There…

ISSUING AN INJUNCTION MEANS "PROCEEDINGS" ARE UNDERWAY AND THE CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AFTER IT WAS SET ASIDE: ALLOWING THE CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENTS IN THIS  APPEAL WOULD BE AN "AFFRONT TO COMMONSENSE"

ISSUING AN INJUNCTION MEANS “PROCEEDINGS” ARE UNDERWAY AND THE CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AFTER IT WAS SET ASIDE: ALLOWING THE CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS IN THIS APPEAL WOULD BE AN “AFFRONT TO COMMONSENSE”

September 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Injunctions, Members Content

Here we look at an ingenious argument about the meaning of “proceedings” and the costs consequences if a claimant has an injunction order set aside.  The claimant argued that the nature of the action he pursued did not amount to…

UPDATED VERSION OF THE CHANCERY GUIDE: A USEFUL LINK

UPDATED VERSION OF THE CHANCERY GUIDE: A USEFUL LINK

September 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The Chancery Guide was updated earlier this month.  Here we look at the Practice Note and have a link to the updated Guide itself. FINDING THE LINK The Practice Note that accompanies it gives a link to the Guide itself…

THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 3: WHERE DO YOU LOOK IF YOU WANT (OR WANT TO OPPOSE) AN APPLICATION THAT A TRIAL BE ADJOURNED BECAUSE A PARTY OR WITNESS IS ILL?

THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 3: WHERE DO YOU LOOK IF YOU WANT (OR WANT TO OPPOSE) AN APPLICATION THAT A TRIAL BE ADJOURNED BECAUSE A PARTY OR WITNESS IS ILL?

September 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The motivation for this series arises from a personal experience earlier this year.  I had travelled to a hotel in readiness for a trial the following day. At midnight I found out that the other side were asking for an…

THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" CASE CONTINUED: WHY THE CIRCUIT JUDGE ERRED AS TO COSTS: FIXED COSTS APPLIED IN ANY EVENT

THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” CASE CONTINUED: WHY THE CIRCUIT JUDGE ERRED AS TO COSTS: FIXED COSTS APPLIED IN ANY EVENT

September 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content

We are returning to a case we have looked at several times already. This time on the question of costs. Since the appellants were successful the costs order against them was overturned. However it was held that the judge erred…

MORE ABOUT WHO CAN PROPERLY "CONDUCT LITIGATION": THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LAW SOCIETY AND SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY: "TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT"

MORE ABOUT WHO CAN PROPERLY “CONDUCT LITIGATION”: THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LAW SOCIETY AND SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY: “TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT”

September 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

As I said yesterday the matters discussed in the recent judgment about whether a fee earner can conduct litigation may have a widespread impact. It is important that litigators are aware of the views of the Law Society and the…

← Previous 1 … 6 7 8 … 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

  • BOTH SIDES WANTED A STRIKE OUT FOR NON-COMPLIANCE – BUT GOT NOWHERE (A FAIRLY EXPENSIVE – AND FRUITLESS DAY OUT…): “LOCKED HORNS” AND “SPIRITED CORRESPONDENCE”
  • THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: WHAT LITIGATION FIRMS NEED TO DO NOW – AND THE CONSEQUENCES IF THEY DON’T: WEBINAR JUNE 25th 2026 (A BARGAIN AT £99)
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 81: IF YOU ARE RELYING ON A STATUTE THAT WASN’T ACTUALLY IN FORCE ON THE DATE IN QUESTION IT MAY HAVE BEEN BETTER FOR YOU TO HAVE PLEADED THIS…
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT WAS SUFFICIENT TO SHOW THAT IT COULD PAY AN ADVERSE COSTS AWARD: APPLICATION FOR SECURITY FOR COSTS REFUSED
  • THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 3: THE KEY THEMES – THE GUIDANCE AND TEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

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.