Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Applying for permission to appeal
"LESS IS MORE" WHEN DRAFTING NOTICES OF APPEAL: THE "KITCHEN SINK" APPROACH  DOES NOT PERSUADE THE COURT OF APPEAL TO GRANT PERMISSION

“LESS IS MORE” WHEN DRAFTING NOTICES OF APPEAL: THE “KITCHEN SINK” APPROACH DOES NOT PERSUADE THE COURT OF APPEAL TO GRANT PERMISSION

July 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

When a Lord Justice of Appeal looks at a notice of appeal and skeleton and refers to a “kitchen sink” approach, we can probably surmise that a proposed appellant  is going to have some difficulty here. When of their colleagues…

BLOATED DRAFT GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND RELENTLESS DOCUMENTARY ATTRITION: NOT A GOOD START WHEN SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL

BLOATED DRAFT GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND RELENTLESS DOCUMENTARY ATTRITION: NOT A GOOD START WHEN SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL

February 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Municipio De Mariana & Ors v BHP Group PLC & Anor [2021] EWHC 146 (TCC) sets out the judge’s concerns in relation to the over-lengthy documents filed in support of an application for…

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…

A JUDGE CANNOT GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL AFTER THE HEARING: MONROE -v- HOPKINS - SECOND ROUND

A JUDGE CANNOT GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL AFTER THE HEARING: MONROE -v- HOPKINS – SECOND ROUND

March 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Members Content

The case of Monroe -v- Hopkins [2017] EWHC 645 (QB) is the second judgment on the case. The judgment today related solely to the defendant’s application for permission to appeal. The judge ruled that he did not have jurisdiction to…

EVIDENCE, PLEADINGS, RE-OPENING CASES AND THE HIGH DUTY OF CARE OWED AT ORAL APPLICATIONS TO APPLY FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL

April 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

This appears to be a day for cases relating to local authorities, disrepair and pleading points. In Uddin -v- London Borough of Southwark [2015] EWCA Civ 369 the Court of Appeal considered several issues relating to evidence, pleadings and the…

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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)

Top Posts

  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • JOINDER OF NEW PARTIES IN EXISTING PROCEEDINGS 2: THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS!)
  • THE JUDGE FOUND AGAINST ME BECAUSE THEY GAVE TOO MUCH LEEWAY TO A LITIGANT IN PERSON : ALLEGATIONS OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE PARTICULARISED (AND CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT)
  • MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 59: UNQUALIFIED PERSON NOT ALLOWED TO REPRESENT PARKING COMPANY AT A SMALL CLAIMS HEARING

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.