Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Capacity
THE QUESTION OF THE CLAIMANT'S CAPACITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT A LITIGATION FRIEND - THIS DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE DEFENDANT'S POSITION

THE QUESTION OF THE CLAIMANT’S CAPACITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT A LITIGATION FRIEND – THIS DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE DEFENDANT’S POSITION

March 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we have a case where a defendant appealed against a decision it agreed with. The judge found that the claimant had capacity and did not require a Litigation Friend. However the defendant’s issue was with the very decision to…

COST BITES 254: DOES YOUR CLIENT HAVE CAPACITY? AN IMPORTANT POINT WHEN CONSIDERING THE VALIDITY OF THE RETAINER: AN ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE SCCO TODAY

COST BITES 254: DOES YOUR CLIENT HAVE CAPACITY? AN IMPORTANT POINT WHEN CONSIDERING THE VALIDITY OF THE RETAINER: AN ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE SCCO TODAY

July 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

It is rare for issues of capacity to considered on an assessment of costs. However that is precisely the issue considered in this case. If the defendant established he did not have capacity when he entered into a retainer with…

PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE

March 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Cannon v Bar Standards Board [2023] EWCA Civ 278 the Court of Appeal held that expert evidence placed before it failed to establish that an appellant lacked capacity.  The case provides importance guidance about the nature and quality of…

WHEN DOES A LITIGANT HAVE CAPACITY? AVOIDING CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS: THE NEED FOR LEGAL ADVICE IS NOT A DETERMINING FACTOR

WHEN DOES A LITIGANT HAVE CAPACITY? AVOIDING CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS: THE NEED FOR LEGAL ADVICE IS NOT A DETERMINING FACTOR

February 9, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is an interesting discussion of capacity to litigate in the judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Richardson-Ruhan v Ruhan & Ors [2021] EWFC 6. It is also worth remarking on the judge’s comments on how the expert’s evidence in…

APPLICANT FAILS TO SATISFY COURT THAT LITIGANT LACKED CAPACITY: HIGH COURT DECISION

APPLICANT FAILS TO SATISFY COURT THAT LITIGANT LACKED CAPACITY: HIGH COURT DECISION

May 7, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

In  Greetham v Greetham [2021] EWHC 998 (QB) Mr Justice Soole rejected an application in relation the appointment of a litigation friend. The applicant failed to prove that the litigant lacked capacity. Further the court did not accept that the…

TAKING APPROPRIATE STEPS WHEN A DEFENDANT DOES NOT HAVE CAPACITY: AN IMPORTANT WARNING

TAKING APPROPRIATE STEPS WHEN A DEFENDANT DOES NOT HAVE CAPACITY: AN IMPORTANT WARNING

February 5, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

A real and profound warning about the dangers of issuing against someone without capacity is given in the judgment of  HHJ Hodge QC sitting as a judge of the High Court in Kumar v Hellard [2021] EWHC 181 (Ch).  …

CAPACITY TO LITIGATE : LITIGATION FRIEND CAN PROPERLY CONTINUE WITH ACTION WHERE CLAIMANT  WAS WITHOUT CAPACITY AT BEGINNING OF CASE

CAPACITY TO LITIGATE : LITIGATION FRIEND CAN PROPERLY CONTINUE WITH ACTION WHERE CLAIMANT WAS WITHOUT CAPACITY AT BEGINNING OF CASE

October 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I was speaking at the MASS conference yesterday about capacity and litigation. It is always the way of things that an interesting point on an issue comes up the day after a presentation.  An issue on capacity to litigate arose…

COURT CANNOT RE-OPEN "FINAL JUDGMENT": ISSUES RELATING TO DEFENDANT'S CAPACITY: EVESHAM --v- WERRETT CONSIDERED

COURT CANNOT RE-OPEN "FINAL JUDGMENT": ISSUES RELATING TO DEFENDANT'S CAPACITY: EVESHAM –v- WERRETT CONSIDERED

April 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In the judgment today  in Eversham & Pershore Housing Association Ltd -v- Werrett [2015] EWHC 1060 (QB) Mr Justice Nicol held that the court could not re-open a decision because of later evidence in relation to the defendant’s capacity. 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

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.