Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Avoiding negligence claims
AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"

AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”

April 17, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where an important time limit was, on the face of it missed, because the court itself “thwarted” genuine attempts to lodge an appeal in time.  It is an object lesson the care that needs to…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE "OPINION" EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014

THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014

April 17, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at at post from twelve years ago concerning judicial protestations about opinion evidence in witness statements. Despite all the warnings have occurred since, and the advent of PD57AC, this remains a regular (and improper) occurrence.  We looked…

MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

April 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The  Revised Law Society Guidance on Mazur was looked at in a previous post. Whilst we wait for the SRA Guidance it may be useful to look at the key differences in the Law Society Guidance before and after the…

MAZUR MATTERS 60: THE REVISED LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE NOTE: SOME KEY POINTS: THIS WILL REQUIRE CLOSER OVERSIGHT OF THE WORK BEING DONE

MAZUR MATTERS 60: THE REVISED LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE NOTE: SOME KEY POINTS: THIS WILL REQUIRE CLOSER OVERSIGHT OF THE WORK BEING DONE

April 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

One remarkable aspect of the Mazur decision is that in a very real sense it is the losers of the case who get to decide what goes on going forward.  The Court of Appeal rejected the submissions of the Law Society…

THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT TO EXTEND TIME  FOR SERVICE AS THE DEFENDANT ASSERTED: THE SCCO REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE

THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE AS THE DEFENDANT ASSERTED: THE SCCO REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

This is an interesting judgement on two levels. Firstly the judge did not accept the defendant’s contention that there had been an agreement to extend time for service of Points of Dispute to a bill of costs. Secondly, applying the…

MAZUR MATTERS 59: REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THIS AROSE BECAUSE SOMEONE DIDN'T KNOW (OR APPLY) THE CORRECT RULES AS TO FIXED COSTS

MAZUR MATTERS 59: REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THIS AROSE BECAUSE SOMEONE DIDN’T KNOW (OR APPLY) THE CORRECT RULES AS TO FIXED COSTS

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fixed Costs, Members Content

One underlying irony about the Mazur debacle is that most of the problems arise because of a mistake as to costs.  The Circuit Judge ordered Ms. Mazur and Mr Stuart £10,653 when, in fact, the costs should only have  been £636.00. …

COST BITES 376: THE NEED TO KEEP THE CLIENT INFORMED OF COSTS BEING INCURRED: THE SOLICITOR SHOULD HAVE INFORMED THE CLIENT THAT COSTS OF US $35,343,213.96 WERE BEING INCURRED

COST BITES 376: THE NEED TO KEEP THE CLIENT INFORMED OF COSTS BEING INCURRED: THE SOLICITOR SHOULD HAVE INFORMED THE CLIENT THAT COSTS OF US $35,343,213.96 WERE BEING INCURRED

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This judgment highlights the need for a solicitor to keep the client fully informed of the costs incurred. The judge observed that the SRA Code of Conduct imposed a positive duty on a solicitor to give the client the best…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS' BILLS

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS’ BILLS

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There have been a large number of posts recently relating to solicitor and own costs assessments.  Many of these cases have related to the issue of whether bills delivered were “statute” bills “interim statute bills” or   simply interim bills. The…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..

April 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Schedules, Webinar

Drafting a Schedule of Damages is not simply a mathematical calculation. It requires legal knowledge, careful analysis, attention to evidence, and practical judgement. Courts frequently criticise poorly prepared schedules, particularly where figures are unsupported, exaggerated, or inconsistent with the evidence….

USEFUL CHECKLISTS TO HELP ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH MAZUR: PART OF THE MATERIALS PROVIDED WITH THE WEBINAR ON THE 9th APRIL

USEFUL CHECKLISTS TO HELP ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH MAZUR: PART OF THE MATERIALS PROVIDED WITH THE WEBINAR ON THE 9th APRIL

April 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Webinar

The webinar on Thursday provides a wealth of material in relation to compliance with the Court of Appeal guidance as to the conduct of litigation after  the Court of Appeal decision in Mazur. In addition there is a series of…

MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 59: UNQUALIFIED PERSON NOT ALLOWED TO REPRESENT PARKING COMPANY AT A SMALL CLAIMS HEARING

MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 59: UNQUALIFIED PERSON NOT ALLOWED TO REPRESENT PARKING COMPANY AT A SMALL CLAIMS HEARING

April 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

I am grateful to Ritchie Young for sending me a copy of this judgment in which the District Judge refused to allow an unauthorised person a right of audience in a small claims track case.  It is not technically part…

MAZUR MATTERS 58: LEARN HOW TO SUPERVISE STAFF PROPERLY - OR RISK GOING TO JAIL: IT IS WISE TO RECORD SUPERVISION ARRANGEMENTS FULLY

MAZUR MATTERS 58: LEARN HOW TO SUPERVISE STAFF PROPERLY – OR RISK GOING TO JAIL: IT IS WISE TO RECORD SUPERVISION ARRANGEMENTS FULLY

April 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Webinar

One key element of the Mazur decision, that needs repeating, is that it does not allow unauthorised persons to “conduct” litigation.  It allows unauthorised people to assist and conduct the tasks involved in litigation so long as they are properly…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY (ON A TUESDAY...) : THE RULES ABOUT SERVING NOTICE OF APPLICATIONS: SERVE AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE - OR TAKE THE RISK

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY (ON A TUESDAY…) : THE RULES ABOUT SERVING NOTICE OF APPLICATIONS: SERVE AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE – OR TAKE THE RISK

April 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There are cases where those making applications make a tactical decision not to serve the application at once. They think, wrongly, that the rules only require three days notice to be given.  This belief if wrong. As we shall see…

MAZUR MATTERS 57: THE INDEMNITY INSURER'S VIEW: "DOES IT CHANGE THAT MUCH REALLY?": "I STRUGGLE TO THINK OF REAL LIFE SCENARIOS THAT WOULD HAVE FALLEN FOUL OF SHELDON J'S DISTINCTION BUT ARE NOW LAWFUL (AND VICE VERSA)"

MAZUR MATTERS 57: THE INDEMNITY INSURER’S VIEW: “DOES IT CHANGE THAT MUCH REALLY?”: “I STRUGGLE TO THINK OF REAL LIFE SCENARIOS THAT WOULD HAVE FALLEN FOUL OF SHELDON J’S DISTINCTION BUT ARE NOW LAWFUL (AND VICE VERSA)”

April 6, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

I have written several times that when it came to providing practical guidance on how to deal with the Mazur judgment it was often insurers that were far more helpful than the regulators.  It is worthwhile having a look at…

ANOTHER CASE ON FAILING TO PAY THE COURT FEE: AN APPEAL WAS STILL LODGED IN TIME EVEN THOUGH NO FEE WAS PAID AT ALL

ANOTHER CASE ON FAILING TO PAY THE COURT FEE: AN APPEAL WAS STILL LODGED IN TIME EVEN THOUGH NO FEE WAS PAID AT ALL

April 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

Here we have a case that extends the principles in Siniakovich v Hassan-Soudey. The Court of Appeal held that a statutory appeal was lodged within time, even though it was sent by email to the court and no fee was…

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS: (THIS IS NOT "AS YOU WERE"):  WEBINAR 9th APRIL 2026

MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS: (THIS IS NOT “AS YOU WERE”): WEBINAR 9th APRIL 2026

April 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Webinar

I have already written about the misunderstandings that have occurred in relation to the Mazur judgment.  The judgment is far more nuanced than some commentators suggest and a detailed knowledge of what is required is essential for anyone involved in…

MAZUR MATTERS 55: THINGS WE DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (2): WHAT DEGREE OF SUPERVISION IS REQUIRED: THIS "WILL ALWAYS DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES"

MAZUR MATTERS 55: THINGS WE DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER TO (2): WHAT DEGREE OF SUPERVISION IS REQUIRED: THIS “WILL ALWAYS DEPEND ON THE CIRCUMSTANCES”

April 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

It is important to note that the Court of Appeal decision yesterday did not create a “free for all” for unauthorised persons to undertake the conduct of litigation. Far from it.  A central part of the judgment was the need…

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 5: THE "NUANCED" BITS: IT IS ALL ABOUT DELEGATION OF TASKS AND SUPERVISION (AND HERE IT IS OVER TO THE REGULATORS...)

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 5: THE “NUANCED” BITS: IT IS ALL ABOUT DELEGATION OF TASKS AND SUPERVISION (AND HERE IT IS OVER TO THE REGULATORS…)

March 31, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

I have already written that the judgement is Mazur is far more nuanced than many commentators have suggested.  It does not give a “free for all” for non-authorised persons to litigate. Rather it gives authorised lawyers the ability to delegate…

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 3: NO DEFINITIVE DEFINITION OF THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: BUT WE DO HAVE THE "MAGNIFICENT SEVEN"

THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 3: NO DEFINITIVE DEFINITION OF THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: BUT WE DO HAVE THE “MAGNIFICENT SEVEN”

March 31, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content

We continue our look at the judgment today by looking at the court’s more detailed consideration of what was meant by the “conduct of litigation”.  The court did not give a definition. However it did give seven key points as to…

MAZUR COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE OVERTURNED: THE SUPERVISION OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS

MAZUR COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: JUDGMENT AT FIRST INSTANCE OVERTURNED: THE SUPERVISION OF UNAUTHORISED PERSONS

March 31, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I will be writing about this judgment throughout the day.  The first posts will contain a summary of the views from the court.  Later posts will analyse the position as a whole. This  post contains a consideration of the carrying…

MASTERING PD57AC - GETTING WITNESS STATEMENTS RIGHT IN THE COMMERCIAL COURTS (AND THE CONSEQUENCES IF YOU DON'T): WEBINAR 30th APRIL 2026

MASTERING PD57AC – GETTING WITNESS STATEMENTS RIGHT IN THE COMMERCIAL COURTS (AND THE CONSEQUENCES IF YOU DON’T): WEBINAR 30th APRIL 2026

March 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Webinar, Witness statements

Witness statements can make—or break—your case in the Commercial Courts. Since the introduction of Practice Direction 57AC in April 2021, the courts have repeatedly emphasised that compliance is not optional. Yet many practitioners continue to fall into the same costly…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 63: WHEN ARE AMENDMENTS TO  PLEADINGS "CONSEQUENTIAL" - DOES A PARTY HAVE "GENERAL RIGHT" TO INTRODUCE NEW MATTERS?

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 63: WHEN ARE AMENDMENTS TO PLEADINGS “CONSEQUENTIAL” – DOES A PARTY HAVE “GENERAL RIGHT” TO INTRODUCE NEW MATTERS?

March 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we continue with our examination of attempts to amend pleadings. We are looking at the same case as the previous post but a different judgment from a different judge.   Here the claimant amended its Particulars of Claim and the…

HOW A FIRM OF SOLICITORS SHOULD NOT CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN LITIGATION: A WORKING EXAMPLE: EVIDENCE THAT WAS "GENERALLY UNRRELIABLE" AND "LACKING IN CREDIBILITY"

HOW A FIRM OF SOLICITORS SHOULD NOT CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN LITIGATION: A WORKING EXAMPLE: EVIDENCE THAT WAS “GENERALLY UNRRELIABLE” AND “LACKING IN CREDIBILITY”

March 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we are looking at a judgment that contains some remarkable observations  and findings about the conduct of a solicitor.  The judge was concerned not only about the failure to comply with directions, the inadequate nature of the statement of…

PROVING THINGS 284: APPLICANT FOR INJUNCTION FAILS ON JUST ABOUT EVERY POINT: THE CASE WAS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND; NO EVIDENCE OF A RISK OF DISSIPATION;  MATTERS THAT LEAVE THE JUDGE "BAFFLED" AND UNCOMFORTABLE

PROVING THINGS 284: APPLICANT FOR INJUNCTION FAILS ON JUST ABOUT EVERY POINT: THE CASE WAS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND; NO EVIDENCE OF A RISK OF DISSIPATION; MATTERS THAT LEAVE THE JUDGE “BAFFLED” AND UNCOMFORTABLE

March 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Injunctions, Members Content, Witness statements

The applicant in this case sought an injunction. The application was (unusually) made on notice.  The respondent did not have the opportunity to put in evidence.  The applicant failed on just about every point. It was unclear what the applicant’s…

GETTING YOUR CASE INTO THE RIGHT COURT: A BIZARRE DECISION TO PUT A  CASE IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION: MAKING THE CORRECT SELECTION IS IMPORTANT AND MIGHT MATTER

GETTING YOUR CASE INTO THE RIGHT COURT: A BIZARRE DECISION TO PUT A CASE IN THE CHANCERY DIVISION: MAKING THE CORRECT SELECTION IS IMPORTANT AND MIGHT MATTER

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

It is important that cases are managed, and heard, in the appropriate specialist court. Here we have a case that went on a frolic of its own into the Chancery Division for a while before being put back into the…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: MAKING A MISTAKE AND THEN BIGGING A DEEPER HOLE FOR YOURSELF: MARCH 2018

THROWBACK FRIDAY: MAKING A MISTAKE AND THEN BIGGING A DEEPER HOLE FOR YOURSELF: MARCH 2018

March 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at a set of circumstances that we have seen  many time, both before and after this post from March 2018. A lawyer makes a mistake, panics and then makes horrendous decisions in an attempt to cover…

EXPERT WATCH 42: THIS IS NOT EXPERT EVIDENCE - BUT A SIMPLE STEP UP FROM "NUMBER CRUNCHING" : ALSO OPINION EVIDENCE SHOULD BE DISTINGUISHED FROM FACTUAL EVIDENCE

EXPERT WATCH 42: THIS IS NOT EXPERT EVIDENCE – BUT A SIMPLE STEP UP FROM “NUMBER CRUNCHING” : ALSO OPINION EVIDENCE SHOULD BE DISTINGUISHED FROM FACTUAL EVIDENCE

March 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we have a case where the judge found evidence provided by experts to be of “assistance” but where he was clear in his view that the information put forward was not expert evidence.   The evidence was “simply a kind…

THE "SEVEN DAY" DOCUMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS: YOU DON'T PLAN NOT TO COMPLY - BUT...

THE “SEVEN DAY” DOCUMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS: YOU DON’T PLAN NOT TO COMPLY – BUT…

March 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In civil procedure it is often the failure to comply with clear and obvious rules that can cause difficulties or annoyance. We have an example here in the Planning Court (however the rules in question apply to all judicial review…

IF YOU MISSED THE WEBINAR ON INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION IT IS NOW AVAILABLE "ON DEMAND"

IF YOU MISSED THE WEBINAR ON INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION IT IS NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”

March 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar

The webinar on informing the client about the costs of litigation is now available “on demand” and  details can be found here.      THE REASONS FOR THE WEBINAR Recent Legal Ombudsman decisions show that solicitors’ firms are being ordered…

COST BITES 368: THERE WERE NO "SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE" WHICH MEANT THE SOLICITOR'S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED OUT OF TIME: THERE IS NOTHING THAT CALLS FOR AN EXPLANATION

COST BITES 368: THERE WERE NO “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE” WHICH MEANT THE SOLICITOR’S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED OUT OF TIME: THERE IS NOTHING THAT CALLS FOR AN EXPLANATION

March 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Costs, Members Content

We are returning to the previous case to look at the second half of the Cost Judge’s decision.   Having determined that the bills were statute bills the judge then considered whether there were “special circumstances” which would entitle the claimant…

THE APPELLATE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE APPELLANTS TO RUN A NEW ISSUE : THE ABILITY TO PAY COSTS IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR AND WAS NOT CONSIDERED PROPERLY

THE APPELLATE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED THE APPELLANTS TO RUN A NEW ISSUE : THE ABILITY TO PAY COSTS IS AN IMPORTANT FACTOR AND WAS NOT CONSIDERED PROPERLY

March 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we have a case where the appellants were, initially, allowed to argue a point that had not been argued in the court below.  The Court of Appeal was clear in its view that the judge should not have allowed…

SERVICE POINTS 31: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO APPLY IN TIME TO LIFT A STAY: A RARE SUCCESS ON A CLAIM FORM ISSUE

SERVICE POINTS 31: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO APPLY IN TIME TO LIFT A STAY: A RARE SUCCESS ON A CLAIM FORM ISSUE

March 24, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form

Here we are looking at an unusual set of facts in relation to service of the claim form, not least because it led to the issues being considered under the Denton criteria and is a (relatively rare) example of a…

HALLUCINATIONS KEEP APPEARING IN THE REPORTS: TWO MORE EXAMPLES: COUNSEL AT FAULT IN BOTH...

HALLUCINATIONS KEEP APPEARING IN THE REPORTS: TWO MORE EXAMPLES: COUNSEL AT FAULT IN BOTH…

March 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are looking at two more examples of “hallucinated” cases appearing in reported cases. In both cases it was counsel that was presenting the case. (In one case counsel was acting for himself). “The incident does, however, demonstrate vividly the…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE NEED TO SERVE A NOTICE DISPUTING THE AUTHENTICITY OF A DOCUMENT: CPR 32.19

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE NEED TO SERVE A NOTICE DISPUTING THE AUTHENTICITY OF A DOCUMENT: CPR 32.19

March 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Admissions, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

Here we look at a case that illustrates a very basic principle of civil procedure and evidence.  It is a case where the claimant was, in essence, disputing the authenticity of several documents.  However a basic procedural step had not…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 60: FAILING TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR "LOSS OF CHANCE" LEADS TO TRIAL BEING RESTRICTED TO LIABILITY (AND THE CLAIMANT'S FACING RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 60: FAILING TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR “LOSS OF CHANCE” LEADS TO TRIAL BEING RESTRICTED TO LIABILITY (AND THE CLAIMANT’S FACING RESPONSIBILITY FOR ADDITIONAL COSTS)

March 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we are looking at a failure to plead the claimant’s case as to damages fully.  The claimant wanted to advance a claim for “loss of chance” in addition to seeking damages on the balance of probability.  The judge rejected…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS OF DRAFTING PLEADINGS: WEBINAR 2nd APRIL 2026

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS OF DRAFTING PLEADINGS: WEBINAR 2nd APRIL 2026

March 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Statements of Case, Webinar

The series on the “Current importance of pleadings” has now reached 59 posts. There are other posts in the series that are  imminent.  This webinar looks at issues in relation to drafting statements of case.   BOOKING DETAILS Are available…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: MORE ABOUT LITIGATORS AND WORKLOAD (IT'S STILL NUTS): MARCH 2016

THROWBACK FRIDAY: MORE ABOUT LITIGATORS AND WORKLOAD (IT’S STILL NUTS): MARCH 2016

March 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Well being

Here we look at a post from March 2016.  It raised some comments at the time and followed on from a previous post we have looked at (which in turn led to several comments).   It asks the, fairly fundamental, question…

CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF HAS ITS OWN LINKEDIN PAGE ("ABOUT TIME TOO" - APPARENTLY)

CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF HAS ITS OWN LINKEDIN PAGE (“ABOUT TIME TOO” – APPARENTLY)

March 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Useful links

Civil Litigation Brief now has its own LinkedIn page.  It is another way of following the posts on this site.  Posts will be posted as they are published and it is another way of being able to keep up to…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 7: HEADING OFF PROBLEMS AT THE OUTSET: (WEBINAR THIS THURSDAY 19th MARCH 2026 - WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS)

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 7: HEADING OFF PROBLEMS AT THE OUTSET: (WEBINAR THIS THURSDAY 19th MARCH 2026 – WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS)

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Webinar

This short series has aimed to highlight the ongoing difficulties that litigators, in particular, can have with giving compliant costs information to their clients.  In looking at this topic it is clear that there are numerous cases where clients have…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 6: YOU SAID IT WOULD COST £2,500 - £3,000 - I'VE PAID YOU £16,000: THE IMPORTANCE OF GIVING ESTIMATES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 6: YOU SAID IT WOULD COST £2,500 – £3,000 – I’VE PAID YOU £16,000: THE IMPORTANCE OF GIVING ESTIMATES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This decision emphasises the fact that when giving costs estimates the solicitor should also do their best to estimate the costs of disbursements in addition to their own costs.  Here the solicitor mentioned that there would be additional costs if…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE "BEAR TRAP" IN WAITING

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE “BEAR TRAP” IN WAITING

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The back to basics point today is based on a recent case which shows the importance of serving the particulars of claim within the four month period allowed for service of the claim form. The claimant served the particulars three…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED AFTER CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: "THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE STRUCK OUT"

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED AFTER CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: “THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE STRUCK OUT”

March 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at the “second half” of the decision considered in the previous post.  Having rejected the claimant’s submissions that breaches of a peremptory order should be considered under CPR 3.10 the judge then went on to consider the…

THE BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER IS A SERIOUS MATTER: IT CANNOT SIMPLY BE DEALT WITH UNDER CPR 3.10

THE BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER IS A SERIOUS MATTER: IT CANNOT SIMPLY BE DEALT WITH UNDER CPR 3.10

March 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at an interesting, but eventually futile, about the approach the court should take when a party was in breach of a peremptory order.  The claimant in breach argued that the court should consider the matter under CPR…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: PLEADINGS SHOULD CONTAIN FACTS NOT ARGUMENT OR RHETORIC: (MARCH 2015)

THROWBACK FRIDAY: PLEADINGS SHOULD CONTAIN FACTS NOT ARGUMENT OR RHETORIC: (MARCH 2015)

March 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The issues raised in the Current Importance of Pleadings series are not new.  We see points as to pleading raised in March 2015.  Here the judge considered a pleading that “leaves much to be desired.”   “The overall result of these…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 5: DISCOURAGING THE USE OF A BTE POLICY (THIS IS NOT GOOD NEWS FOR THE SOLICITOR...)

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 5: DISCOURAGING THE USE OF A BTE POLICY (THIS IS NOT GOOD NEWS FOR THE SOLICITOR…)

March 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We continue with our examination of the Legal Ombudsman’s decisions about costs.  The issue here was whether the solicitors were correct to discourage the use of an BTE policy and act privately taking out ATE insurance. “It is expected by…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 4: GOING OUTSIDE THE LEVEL OF LEGAL INSURANCE COVER

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 4: GOING OUTSIDE THE LEVEL OF LEGAL INSURANCE COVER

March 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at a decision in relation to legal expenses insurance. The solicitor had gone outside the cover of the insurance but not informed the client.  The Ombudsman’s conclusions on this issue are not a great surprise… “The…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A CLIENT BLAMES THEIR SOLICITOR FOR ISSUES IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT: SOME EXAMPLES CONSIDERED

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A CLIENT BLAMES THEIR SOLICITOR FOR ISSUES IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT: SOME EXAMPLES CONSIDERED

March 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Occasionally I give in-house presentations on drafting witness statements.  I always emphasise the importance of protecting the client from over-enthusiastic drafting by their lawyer to make sure that the witness statement is accurate and compliant.  I then ask what steps…

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 3: FAILURE TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF FUNDING

COSTS INFORMATION AND THE OMBUDSMAN 3: FAILURE TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF FUNDING

March 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are continuing with our examination of Legal Ombudsman decisions on issues relating to costs.  Here there was an finding of inadequate service because of a failure to consider whether the client had legal insurance that cover the costs involved….

WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 29th APRIL 2026

WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 29th APRIL 2026

March 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Part 36, Personal Injury, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal’s decision in Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd has sharpened the costs risks faced by claimants who accept a Part 36 offer outside the relevant period. While a claimant who accepts late remains subject to fixed recoverable costs…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: EXHIBITS: A REMINDER OF THE RULES, WHERE THINGS GO WRONG AND HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: EXHIBITS: A REMINDER OF THE RULES, WHERE THINGS GO WRONG AND HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS

March 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The “exhibiting” of documents  to witness statements and affidavits is common. It is surprising how common it is for the exhibit, and the witness statement, to fail to comply with the rules. Here we look at the rules relating to…

1 2 … 11 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES

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.