Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Civil Procedure Rules » Page 18
NEW WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED TO CASE MANAGEMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTIONS IS THE ONLY SAFE OPTION

NEW WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED TO CASE MANAGEMENT: COMPLIANCE WITH DIRECTIONS IS THE ONLY SAFE OPTION

October 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In SJ Moore (Jeweller) Limited -v- Squibb Group Limited [2018] EWHC 2731 (QB) Denton principles were considered and applied when the defendant wanted to adduce new evidence.  What is notable  here is the fact that the defendant had the expert…

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

October 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Adam Heppinstall for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser today in Bates -v- The Post Office [2018] EWHC 2968 (QB). This is a forceful judgment and what the judge had…

CONSTRUCTION OF A PART 36 OFFER: DEFENDANT'S ARGUMENT IS A PLOT TOO FAR

CONSTRUCTION OF A PART 36 OFFER: DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT IS A PLOT TOO FAR

October 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

In Bentley Design Consultants Ltd v Sansom [2018] EWHC 2238 (TCC) Mrs Justice Jefford DBE considered a novel point on the construction of a Part 36 offer.  She held that a Part 36 offer made by a claimant could not be…

WHEN YOU SETTLE THE APPLICATION BUT LEAVE IT TO THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE ISSUE OF COSTS: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH

WHEN YOU SETTLE THE APPLICATION BUT LEAVE IT TO THE JUDGE TO DETERMINE THE ISSUE OF COSTS: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH

October 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content

In Conversant Wireless Licensing SARL v Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2549 (Ch) Mr Justice Henry Carr had to consider the appropriate order to make when the parties had agreed the terms of an application but could not…

AVOIDING PROCEDURAL PITFALLS - AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT: WEBINAR 6th DECEMBER 2018: HELPING LITIGATORS SLEEP SOUNDLY AT NIGHT...

AVOIDING PROCEDURAL PITFALLS – AND PUTTING THEM RIGHT: WEBINAR 6th DECEMBER 2018: HELPING LITIGATORS SLEEP SOUNDLY AT NIGHT…

October 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Courses, Members Content

On the 6th December I am presenting a webinar “Avoiding Procedural Pitfalls and Putting Them Right”. The aim is to look at the key problem areas of civil procedure, how to avoid problems and how to rectify problems if things…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REQUIRED WHEN RESPONDENT'S NOTICE SERVED LATE: DENTON CONSIDERED

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REQUIRED WHEN RESPONDENT’S NOTICE SERVED LATE: DENTON CONSIDERED

October 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Livewest Homes Ltd v Bamber [2018] EWHC 2454 (QB) Mr Justice Dingemans considered the issue of relief from sanctions when a Respondent’s Notice was served late. It is a useful reminder of the importance of serving a respondent’s notice and…

DENTON DECISIONS - AN INVALUABLE RESOURCE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - A THEMATIC GUIDE UPDATED

DENTON DECISIONS – AN INVALUABLE RESOURCE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS – A THEMATIC GUIDE UPDATED

September 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Useful links

I have written before about the invaluable resource provided by The Denton Resource. This has now been updated and is available  following the link here.  Congratulations to barrister Rachel Segal who took on this painstaking task.   The Resource is a…

BACK TO BASICS 16: COSTS BUDGETING: THE GUIDANCE NOTES ON PRECEDENT H

BACK TO BASICS 16: COSTS BUDGETING: THE GUIDANCE NOTES ON PRECEDENT H

September 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

There is much written about the process of costs budgeting.  There is much to be said, when preparing for a hearing – and often at the hearing itself, looking at the Practice Direction and Guidance Notes. THE PRACTICE DIRECTION The…

STATEMENTS OF CASE: KEEP THEM SIMPLE: NO NEED TO PLEAD A REFERENCE TO SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN IN A CASE ALLEGING BREACH OF CONTRACT

STATEMENTS OF CASE: KEEP THEM SIMPLE: NO NEED TO PLEAD A REFERENCE TO SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN IN A CASE ALLEGING BREACH OF CONTRACT

September 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Portland Stone Firms Ltd & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors [2018] EWHC 2341 (QB) Mr Justice Stuart-Smith had some telling observations about the way in which statements of case should be drafted. “The applications before the Court have…

DENTON PRINCIPLES MEANS THAT APPEAL BITES THE DUST: CONFUSION AND BEING "LOST IN THE FOREST" ARE NOT GOOD GROUNDS FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

DENTON PRINCIPLES MEANS THAT APPEAL BITES THE DUST: CONFUSION AND BEING “LOST IN THE FOREST” ARE NOT GOOD GROUNDS FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME

September 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The Denton principles are considered in detail in the judgment of Edward Murray (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Sabesan v London Borough of Waltham Forest [2018] EWHC 2373 (Admin).   The judgment confirms that the Denton principles are applicable to…

NO DUTY ON A PARTY TO INFORM AN OPPOSING PARTY THEY ARE MAKING AN ERROR: THE APPEAL JUDGMENT IN PHOENIX IN FULL:

NO DUTY ON A PARTY TO INFORM AN OPPOSING PARTY THEY ARE MAKING AN ERROR: THE APPEAL JUDGMENT IN PHOENIX IN FULL:

August 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

I have already noted that the judgment at first instance in  Woodward & Anor v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2018] EWHC 334 (Ch) has been overturned. The full appeal judgment is now available on BAILLI at [2018] EWHC 2152 (Ch), a decision of HH…

CARE EXPERTS, ALLOWED ON APPEAL: NEW EVIDENCE ALSO ALLOWED

CARE EXPERTS, ALLOWED ON APPEAL: NEW EVIDENCE ALSO ALLOWED

August 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Ryan v Resende [2018] EWHC 2145 (QB) Mr Justice Goose allowed the claimant’s appeal and granted permission for it to rely on a care expert.  The judgment shows the importance of having evidence to hand to counter an argument that…

THE KIMATHI DECISION 2: TRANSLATORS ON TRIAL: ALSO A LOOK AT THE GUIDANCE ON TRANSLATING WITNESS STATEMENTS

THE KIMATHI DECISION 2: TRANSLATORS ON TRIAL: ALSO A LOOK AT THE GUIDANCE ON TRANSLATING WITNESS STATEMENTS

August 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the second in the series that looks at the decision in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 2066 (QB).  Here we look at issues relating to the translators.  It shows the way in which the…

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 11:  THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE "DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION" PURPOSES AND THE "DATE OF ISSUE" FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 11: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE “DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION” PURPOSES AND THE “DATE OF ISSUE” FOR THE PURPOSES OF SERVICE

August 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

There were a number of search terms which led people to this blog today that related to the date of service and date of issue.  The confusion is, perhaps, easy to understand The relevant date for limitation purposes is the date…

APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM REFUSED: CLAIMANT'S CASE AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT GOES UP IN SMOKE...

APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM REFUSED: CLAIMANT’S CASE AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT GOES UP IN SMOKE…

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Viner -v- Volkswagen Group Limited [2018] EWHC 2006 (QB) Senior Master Fontaine refused the claimants’ application to extend time for service of the claim form. A link to the judgment is available from the Law Society Gazette article on…

CLAIMANT OBTAINS  INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER DEFENDANT'S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER: "BIMBLING" AND OTHER TALES OF MODERN LITIGATION

CLAIMANT OBTAINS INDEMNITY COSTS AFTER DEFENDANT’S LATE ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER: “BIMBLING” AND OTHER TALES OF MODERN LITIGATION

July 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

On the Leigh Day website there is a link to a judgment of H.H.J Alan Gore QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in the case of Holmes -v- West London Mental Health NHS Turst (29th June 2018).  The judge…

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 10: CHALLENGING THE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS MUST BE DONE PROMPTLY: COURT REFUSES LATE APPLICATION - DENTON CRITERIA APPLIED

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 10: CHALLENGING THE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS MUST BE DONE PROMPTLY: COURT REFUSES LATE APPLICATION – DENTON CRITERIA APPLIED

July 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a short addendum to the judgment of Lionel Persey QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Lloyd v Kruger [2018] EWHC 2011 (Comm). This deals with a very late application by the claimant to assert that documents were…

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE: LIMITATION,  SECTION 33 AND DENTON: CARDS ON THE TABLE PLEASE - THIS IS THE CPR

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE: LIMITATION, SECTION 33 AND DENTON: CARDS ON THE TABLE PLEASE – THIS IS THE CPR

July 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Skeleton arguments, Written advocacy

In TPE v Franks [2018] EWHC 1765 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles set aside a default judgment.  The case contains some important observations as to how the courts should consider an application to set aside a default judgment – considering…

SOLICITOR AND CLIENT COSTS: A PRACTICAL GUIDE - BOOK REVIEW: BUY IT AND READ IT: £30 WORTH SPENDING

SOLICITOR AND CLIENT COSTS: A PRACTICAL GUIDE – BOOK REVIEW: BUY IT AND READ IT: £30 WORTH SPENDING

July 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Book Review, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Disputes  about costs between lawyers and their (former) clients can be “challenging”. Indeed they can be vitriolic and expensive.  The lawyer thinking “We’ve done the work” – the client thinking “how much” and “I got nothing out of it, why…

WHEN IS A REPORT NOT A MEDICAL REPORT?  RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A "MEDICAL REPORT" WITH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

WHEN IS A REPORT NOT A MEDICAL REPORT? RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A “MEDICAL REPORT” WITH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

July 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

In a judgment given today at Leeds County Court His Honour Judge Gosnell held that a claimant, seeking damages for industrial deafness, breached the rules when issuing by not serving a medical report but serving an “AMR” report.  The judge,…

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 7: THE "BACK TO BASICS" SERIES

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 7: THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES

June 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

I am looking back at the posts that have been part of a series over the past five years. The “Back to Basics” posts are part of  a series that is  very much ongoing. The aim of each post is…

WHEN LESSONS ARE NOT LEARNT: "IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS" : COPY AND PASTE FUNCTION OF A WORD PROCESSOR WILL NOT IMPRESS A JUDGE

WHEN LESSONS ARE NOT LEARNT: “IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS” : COPY AND PASTE FUNCTION OF A WORD PROCESSOR WILL NOT IMPRESS A JUDGE

June 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

It is worth looking in more detail at the the judgment  of Mr Justice Fraser in  Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2018] EWHC 1577 (TCC).  In particular on witness statements.   The judgment sets out some important lessons (it…

THE IMPORTANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION

THE IMPORTANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION

May 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

This post is caused by a search term that arrived on this blog today “Is an application for an extension of time an application for relief from sanctions?”. The short answer to that is – it depends.  An application made after…

STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE? WELL YOU MAY NOT BE: COURT ORDERS THAT MAY NOT COMPLY WITH COURT RULES

STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE? WELL YOU MAY NOT BE: COURT ORDERS THAT MAY NOT COMPLY WITH COURT RULES

May 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

When the rules committee re-introduced the concept of “automatic striking out” into the rules it was always going to cause problems. A case can be automatically struck out for failure to pay the trial fee in time.  However some Court…

CIVIL PROCEDURE - BACK TO BASICS 7: BUNDLES: A CHANCE TO REVISIT "SEDLEY'S LAWS"

CIVIL PROCEDURE – BACK TO BASICS 7: BUNDLES: A CHANCE TO REVISIT “SEDLEY’S LAWS”

May 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content

If there is a league for blogs with the most number of  posts about bundles then Civil Litigation Brief may well be in the top 10 (sadly I suspect even in the top place). There is a reason for this….

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "KNOWLEDGE" AND "BELIEF"? A CASE AND A REVIEW OF 10 KEY POINTS

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “KNOWLEDGE” AND “BELIEF”? A CASE AND A REVIEW OF 10 KEY POINTS

May 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at the importance of giving the source of information and belief when a party (and particularly when a legal representative) makes a witness statement. It is sometimes possible for you opponent to attempt to…

JUDICIALLY REVIEWING THE COUNTY COURT: PROCEDURAL CONFUSION, UNPLEADED POINTS AND THE HIGH STANDARD TO BE MET WHEN ATTEMPTING TO JUDICIALLY REVIEW A COUNTY COURT DECISION

JUDICIALLY REVIEWING THE COUNTY COURT: PROCEDURAL CONFUSION, UNPLEADED POINTS AND THE HIGH STANDARD TO BE MET WHEN ATTEMPTING TO JUDICIALLY REVIEW A COUNTY COURT DECISION

May 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

There are many matters of interest in the short judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Watkins, R (On the Application Of) v Newcastle Upon Tyne County Court [2018] EWHC 1029, a rare example of a party trying to judicially review a…

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO A CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT FAILED TO GET PERMISSION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS

DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED TO A CASE WHERE A CLAIMANT FAILED TO GET PERMISSION TO ISSUE PROCEEDINGS

May 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Although the Denton principles are much more settled it is prudent to keep a weather eye on cases where they are considered. His Honour Judge Davis-White QC (sitting as a judge of the Chancery Division in Leeds) applied the Denton principles in a…

LEAVE TO APPEAL, APPEAL NOTICES AND THE NEED TO APPLY TO AMEND: COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES IS CRUCIAL: KNOW THE RULES

April 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Hickey v The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2018] EWCA Civ 851 the Court of Appeal set out, in categorical terms, that parties should comply with the provisions relating to permission to appeal. In particular a party cannot…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM AT THE "OLD ADDRESS": THE HIERARCHY OF MEASURES A CLAIMANT HAS TO TAKE

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM AT THE “OLD ADDRESS”: THE HIERARCHY OF MEASURES A CLAIMANT HAS TO TAKE

March 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

A search term arrived on this blog today “Service of claim form at old address”.  This is an interesting issue to look at following the earlier posts on service. In particular the hierarchy of measures a claimant is required to…

SERVICE OF A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT: MURPHY -V- STAPLES RE-VISITED

SERVICE OF A COMPANY UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT: MURPHY -V- STAPLES RE-VISITED

March 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

I am likely to be returning to the judgment of Master Bowles in Woodward & Anor v Phoenix Healthcare Distribution Ltd [2018] EWHC 334 (Ch) several times on this blog. If the decision is appealed and upheld it is likely to…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS : A CLASSIC CASE FOR RELIEF TO BE GRANTED: NOTICE TO PROVE SERVED LATE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS : A CLASSIC CASE FOR RELIEF TO BE GRANTED: NOTICE TO PROVE SERVED LATE

March 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Tuke v JD Classics Ltd [2018] EWHC 531 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles granted a claimant relief from sanctions when a “Notice to Prove” was served late.  It is a reminder, amongst other things, of the need to serve a…

LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE CLAIMANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE CLAIMANT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

March 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

In the judgment today in Springer v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 436 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that refused to give relief from sanctions following late service of notice of funding.  The case shows…

INTERPLEADER PROCEEDINGS: FILLING THE GAP IN THE RULES

INTERPLEADER PROCEEDINGS: FILLING THE GAP IN THE RULES

February 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Enforcement, Members Content

In Celador Radio Ltd v Rancho Steak House Ltd (Equitable Interpleader – Enforcement) [2018] EWHC 219 (QB) Master McCloud had to look back at a few centuries of jurisprudence in order to find a solution to a very modern problem. What…

A "PART 36 OFFER" THAT ATTEMPTS TO VARY USUAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER AT ALL:  HIGH COURT DECISION

A “PART 36 OFFER” THAT ATTEMPTS TO VARY USUAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES IS NOT A PART 36 OFFER AT ALL: HIGH COURT DECISION

February 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

In James v James & Ors [2018] EWHC 242 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) determined an interesting issue in relation to an offer made in the course of proceedings.  A “Part 36” offer which attempted to…

INAPPROPRIATE USE OF PART 8 PROCEDURE: "AN ENTIRELY UNSATISFACTORY WAY TO PROCEED": HIGH COURT DECISION

INAPPROPRIATE USE OF PART 8 PROCEDURE: “AN ENTIRELY UNSATISFACTORY WAY TO PROCEED”: HIGH COURT DECISION

January 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Victory House General Partner Ltd v RGB P&C Ltd [2018] EWHC 102 (TCC) Miss Joanna Smith QC (sitting as a Deputy) was clear in her view that a claimant had used the Part 8 procedure inappropriately. “In my judgment this…

THE PERILOUS STRATEGY OF SERVING  EVIDENCE  LATE: DENTON APPLIES:  A RELEVANT FACTOR IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION

THE PERILOUS STRATEGY OF SERVING EVIDENCE LATE: DENTON APPLIES: A RELEVANT FACTOR IN A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION

January 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Summary judgment, Witness statements

The case of  Crown House Technologies Ltd v Cardiff Commissioning Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 54 (TCC) highlights the dangers of waiting to serve evidence until the last moment. If it is served late then a party requires permission of the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON'T COMPLY WITH THE RULES:  10 REASONS WHY THE GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT: LITIGATION REQUIRES EVIDENCE NOT GOSSIP

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY THE GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT: LITIGATION REQUIRES EVIDENCE NOT GOSSIP

January 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a brief report on Lawtel that highlights the need for compliance with the rules relating to witness statements. The issue of failing to give sources of information and belief has been dealt with several times on this blog….

DENTON APPLIED WHEN THE OTHER SIDE DOES NOT SHOW UP FOR TRIAL

DENTON APPLIED WHEN THE OTHER SIDE DOES NOT SHOW UP FOR TRIAL

January 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Foreman v Williams [2017] EWHC 3370 (QB) Peter Marquand (sitting as a High Court judge) considered the application of the Denton principles in an unusual context.  The claimant required relief from sanctions because he was unable to serve documents on…

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2017 (I):  "SURVIVING THE EMOTIONS OF LITIGATION" & "THINGS THAT IRRITATE JUDGES"

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2017 (I): “SURVIVING THE EMOTIONS OF LITIGATION” & “THINGS THAT IRRITATE JUDGES”

December 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Review

This is the fourth annual review on this blog. This year I have decided to break it into a number of reviews.  First it is interesting to look at what is being read on this site and the search terms…

CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: MCGANN -V- BISPING: ROUND 3: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND "IMPLICIT" ORDERS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: MCGANN -V- BISPING: ROUND 3: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND “IMPLICIT” ORDERS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

December 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

We have already looked twice at the “sparring” arguments in relation to procedure in the case of  McGann v Bisping [2017] EWHC 2951 (Comm). A further procedural issue arose as to whether a party was debarred from calling evidence at all. The…

COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL  - IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD

COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL – IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD

December 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

The decision in Salekipour & Anor v Parmar [2017] EWCA Civ 2141 was made after three previous hearings a (including two appeal hearings) in the lower courts.  It was the only time the claimants were successful.  It involved an important procedural…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER

December 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

In Couper v Irwin Mitchell LLP & Ors [2017] EWHC 3231 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when the claimant had issued proceedings in breach of a civil restraint order. The claimant, however, was given…

ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS DEPLOYED IN COURT: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION

ACCESS TO DOCUMENTS DEPLOYED IN COURT: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION

December 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

The judgment of Master McCloud in  Dring v Cape Distribution Ltd & Anor (Constitution – access to courts – open justice) [2017] EWHC 3154 (QB) considers the issue of whether the public should have access to documents disclosed during the course…

BE WARY OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY  - IF YOU SERVE AND DO NOTHING

BE WARY OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY – IF YOU SERVE AND DO NOTHING

November 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content

CPR 15,11(2) provides for an automatic stay. The judgment in Citicorp Trustee Company Ltd & Anor v Al-Sanea & Anor [2017] EWHC 2845 (Comm) shows that it is normally not difficult to lift that stay.  The key point is to know…

MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 3: THE DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION IS THE DATE ON THE CLAIM FORM

MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION 3: THE DATE OF ISSUE FOR LIMITATION IS THE DATE ON THE CLAIM FORM

October 15, 2017 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content

Once or twice a month I receive a phone call from practitioners in a panic.  They sent the claim form to court in good time but the date of issue is outside the limitation period.  Further some defendants still take…

COST BUDGET SERVED TWO MONTHS LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED: DELAY DOES NOT ALWAYS GIVE RISE TO A SIGNIFICANT BREACH

COST BUDGET SERVED TWO MONTHS LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED: DELAY DOES NOT ALWAYS GIVE RISE TO A SIGNIFICANT BREACH

October 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

I am grateful to my colleague Colin Richmond for sending me a copy of the decision of His Honour Judge Gosnell  In Hewitt -v- Smith (Bradford County Court 16th June 2017) relating to a successful appeal from a refusal to…

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DETAILS OF CLAIM DO NOT CONSTITUTE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DETAILS OF CLAIM DO NOT CONSTITUTE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

October 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents

In Chelsea Bridge Apartments Ltd -v- Old Street Homes Ltd (Deputy Master Cousins, 4th September 2017*) Deputy Master Cousins refused the claimants’ application for relief from sanctions in failing to serve Particulars of claim on time. “I find that the…

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: PUTTING IN THE POST ON REQUISITE DATE IS GOOD SERVICE: NO SAFE HARBOUR FOR DEFENDANTS ON THIS ISSUE

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE: PUTTING IN THE POST ON REQUISITE DATE IS GOOD SERVICE: NO SAFE HARBOUR FOR DEFENDANTS ON THIS ISSUE

September 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

Master McCloud has already made observations about the ” dry and unlovely crop of procedural service issues” that are regularly coming before the Masters.  Another issue was considered in  Jones v Chichester Harbour Conservancy & Ors [2017] EWHC 2270. “… the correct…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS  FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER:  APPLICATION REFUSED:  A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: APPLICATION REFUSED: A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE

September 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

In The Financial Conduct Authority v Da Vinci Invest Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2220 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden rejected a defendant’s application for relief from sanctions for breach of a peremptory order. It is unusual in that the court considered…

← Previous 1 … 17 18 19 … 28 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

  • 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"
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT

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.