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
SERVICE OF THE  CLAIM FORM ON A SOLICITOR (NOT THE FIRST TIME I'VE WRITTEN ABOUT THIS AND PROBABLY NOT THE LAST...)

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ON A SOLICITOR (NOT THE FIRST TIME I’VE WRITTEN ABOUT THIS AND PROBABLY NOT THE LAST…)

January 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Every so often, but sometimes I think not often enough, I write posts on the dangers relating to service of the claim form.  Here is a quick reminder about the basic principles of serving on a solicitor.  This post has…

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP - DECEMBER 2019

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – DECEMBER 2019

January 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Links and articles to blog posts and articles available online from December 2019. Costs Costs Barrister Cash flow and catastrophic personal injury litigation Costs Barrister Fixed costs and translation fees Association for Costs Lawyers Court can order costs in foreign…

THE COURT WILL NOT READILY IMPLY SANCTIONS INTO ORDERS THAT DO NOT EXPRESSLY CONTAIN SANCTIONS: AN EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT FOR LITIGATORS

THE COURT WILL NOT READILY IMPLY SANCTIONS INTO ORDERS THAT DO NOT EXPRESSLY CONTAIN SANCTIONS: AN EARLY CHRISTMAS PRESENT FOR LITIGATORS

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In  Djurberg v London Borough of Richmond & Ors [2019] EWHC 3342 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh held that a party did not require relief from sanctions when it failed to comply with a court order that did not impose a…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: PART 36: THE GROWTH IN CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS - AND WHY THE CONSEQUENCES USUALLY APPLY

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE THE YEAR IN REVIEW: PART 36: THE GROWTH IN CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFERS – AND WHY THE CONSEQUENCES USUALLY APPLY

December 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

Looking back it is clear that this has been a very busy year for cases on Part 36. Part of the reason for this has been the growth in cases relating to claimant’s offers.  There are a number of key…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995

December 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Deputy Master Linwood in Barnaby & Anor v Johnson (aka Smith) [2019] EWHC 3344 (Ch) provides a reminder of the terms of Section 4 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and an example of its application.  …

CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE

CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE

December 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Interest, Members Content, Part 36

There are several  interesting aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443. Here I want to look at the part of the judgment that deals with the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING

December 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Striking out

The Denton principles were considered in an unusual context by Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Oliver v Shaikh [2019] EWHC 3389 (QB).   THE CASE The claimant is a Circuit Judge. He brought an action for harassment against the defendant….

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE - THE YEAR IN REVIEW (3): SANCTIONS AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT...)

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (3): SANCTIONS AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT…)

December 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Another certainty about writing about civil procedure is that every year will bring a batch of applications relating to sanctions and relief from sanctions.  This year has been no different.  We start off (from the end of last year) with…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE - THE YEAR IN REVIEW (2): SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM (AND ALLIED ISSUES)

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (2): SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM (AND ALLIED ISSUES)

December 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The one “certainty” about writing about civil procedure is that every year there will be a few (often more than few)cases about service of the claim form.  This is always a fruitful source of difficulty for claimants.  The causes of…

PART 36: A SUCCESSFUL LITIGANT CAN BE BULLISH:  CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER AND THERE WAS NOTHING UNJUST IN THE DEFENDANT PAYING THE PRICE

PART 36: A SUCCESSFUL LITIGANT CAN BE BULLISH: CLAIMANT BEATS ITS OWN PART 36 OFFER AND THERE WAS NOTHING UNJUST IN THE DEFENDANT PAYING THE PRICE

December 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

In Kivells Ltd v Torridge District Council [2019] EWHC 3210 (TCC) the claimant beat its own Part 36 offer (by a fair margin). HHJ Russen QC rejected the defendant’s argument that it would be unjust to apply the normal Part…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 73: THE AUTOMATIC STAY

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 73: THE AUTOMATIC STAY

December 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

CPR 15,11(2) provides for an automatic stay if nothing happens in an action for six months after service.  This is a rule that can be overlooked.   THE RULE CPR rule 15.11. Sub-paragraph (1) of that rule provides that: “Where…

IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT? WELL, IT DEPENDS... (& IT HAS CONSEQUENCES)

IS A CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT? WELL, IT DEPENDS… (& IT HAS CONSEQUENCES)

November 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Healys LLP v Partridge & Anor [2019] EWHC 2471 (Ch) Kelyn Bacon QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the issue of whether a conditional fee agreement was a contentious business agreement.  This has practical consequences in…

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE'S DECISION

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE’S DECISION

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

In  L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor v Liqwd Inc & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1943  the Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s decision not to admit new evidence that a defendant attempted to introduce after judgment was handed down….

LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL...): MASTER'S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING

LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL…): MASTER’S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING

November 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There are some observations in the judgment of Master Thornett in Palizban v Protech (UK) Ltd [2019] EWHC 3090 (QB) that every litigator should read.  It relates to the manner in which solicitors present witness statements, and documents, in interlocutory…

SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND THE "TRAP FOR THE UNWARY CLAIMANT": THE TRAP OPERATED AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED

SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND THE “TRAP FOR THE UNWARY CLAIMANT”: THE TRAP OPERATED AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED

November 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

The judgment of Chief Master Marsh today in Maggistro-Contenta & Anor v O’Shea & Anor [2019] EWHC 3035 (Ch) is a prime example of difficulties being caused because of a mistake in relation to the rules relating to service.   It…

ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF"

ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF”

November 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Parties to actions, Relief from sanctions

In ABC v Google LLC [2019] EWHC 3020 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini refused an (anonymous) claimants application for relief from sanctions.  The case has some unusual features, however it does highlight the point that a relief from sanctions application…

STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

November 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Wickes Building Supplies Ltd v Blair [2019] EWCA Civ 1934  is an important one in relation to late service of evidence and Stage 3 of the Protocol.  It shows the importance…

COURT IN THE MIDDLE? CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AND LEGAL AID: JUDGE EMPHASISES THE COMPLEX MESS ABOUT FUNDING

COURT IN THE MIDDLE? CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AND LEGAL AID: JUDGE EMPHASISES THE COMPLEX MESS ABOUT FUNDING

November 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

There have been concerns in the past about the way in which civil committal proceedings are carried out.  A guide to the careful approach needed is shown in the judgment of Chamberlain J in  The All England Lawn Tennis Club…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CANDOUR FROM THE APPLICANT AND NO EVIDENCE FROM THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE PREJUDICE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CANDOUR FROM THE APPLICANT AND NO EVIDENCE FROM THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE PREJUDICE

November 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a report of a case where relief from sanctions was granted in Anglia Autoflow North America LLC and Another v Anglia Autoflow Ltd [2019] Costs LR 155. One thing that marks this case is the total candour from the…

THE RIDICULOUS RULES ABOUT PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: DOES THE RULES COMMITTEE JUST NOT LISTEN (OR JUST NOT CARE)?

THE RIDICULOUS RULES ABOUT PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: DOES THE RULES COMMITTEE JUST NOT LISTEN (OR JUST NOT CARE)?

November 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

The previous post in this case on the judgment in Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) highlights the problems posed by one of the most ridiculous rules…

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROMPT APPLICATIONS

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROMPT APPLICATIONS

November 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) Matthew Gullick (sitting as a High Court judge) granted the claimants relief from sanctions in relation to late service…

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 5: THINGS WILL GO WRONG: "YOU GOTTA HAVE A PLAN": DON'T CRASH...

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 5: THINGS WILL GO WRONG: “YOU GOTTA HAVE A PLAN”: DON’T CRASH…

October 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

No matter how hard you try, on occasions, things will go wrong in litigation.  Do you have a plan?  Here we examine the need to have a plan to cover default and other issues in litigation. We then look in…

PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)

PROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS FOR EXTENSIONS OF TIME (CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYERS DO NOT GET EXCITED)

October 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Today seems a good day to consider prospective applications for extensions of time. These are going to figure in every litigators career at some point.  A knowledge of the relevant law is essential. A prospective application of time is dealt…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT IS ENFORCEABLE AFTER DEATH: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENT IS ENFORCEABLE AFTER DEATH: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT TODAY

October 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

In Higgins & Co Lawyers Ltd -v- Evans [2019] EWHC 2809 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini overturned a decision that a conditional fee agreement was not enforceable after death. THE CASE The deceased had signed a CFA agreement with the…

COUNTER-SCHEDULES: WORDS OF WISDOM FROM TWITTER

COUNTER-SCHEDULES: WORDS OF WISDOM FROM TWITTER

October 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

Twitter this afternoon gave rise to a number of interesting discussions about the role of the counter-schedule.  I got permission to share some of the contributions. THE START It started with Sarah Pritchard QC looking for ideas for a talk…

WHY PROCEDURAL RULES ARE IMPORTANT (AND LEAD TO SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE): "JUDGES ARE NOT SUPERHUMAN, AND DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS"

WHY PROCEDURAL RULES ARE IMPORTANT (AND LEAD TO SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE): “JUDGES ARE NOT SUPERHUMAN, AND DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS”

October 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

In  Paralel Routs Ltd v Fedotov [2019] EWHC 2656 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a judge of the High Court) emphasised the importance of procedural rules.   There are quite a few interesting observations in relation to disclosure, redaction, civil…

"NOT ALL JUDGES OR COUNSEL ARE HUMOURLESS AUTOMATONS": NO JUDICIAL BIAS WHEN EVIDENCE GIVEN BY WAY OF A SONG

“NOT ALL JUDGES OR COUNSEL ARE HUMOURLESS AUTOMATONS”: NO JUDICIAL BIAS WHEN EVIDENCE GIVEN BY WAY OF A SONG

October 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

It is not often that appeals over planning decisions make their way to this blog. It must be even rarer for such appeals to consider the question and appropriateness of humour (and song) in the judicial process. That is what…

THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

October 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Experts, Limitation, Members Content, QOCS, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

  The “Back to Basics” series, as the title suggests, deals with some of the basic elements of civil procedure. It covers everything from applications and bundles to the taking of witness statements.  The titles are often prompted by elements…

THE TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE LEADS TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED

THE TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE LEADS TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED

October 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

In Haider v DSM Demolition Ltd [2019] EWHC 2712 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles refused a claimant’s appeal against a finding that the defendant was not negligent. He granted the defendant relief from sanctions and allowed an appeal against a…

REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: "THE SANCTION WAS WHOLLY DISPROPORTIONATE AND IT WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT RELIEF"

REFUSAL TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL: “THE SANCTION WAS WHOLLY DISPROPORTIONATE AND IT WAS WRONG NOT TO GRANT RELIEF”

October 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Michael v Lillitos [2019] EWHC 2716 (QB) Mrs Justice Steyn overturned a decision refusing relief from sanctions.  The Appellant had made payments by cheque rather than by bank transfer.   It is also an important example of the pitfalls caused…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD...

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD…

October 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One, unusual, aspect of the decision in Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) is that the experts had sought directions from the court. This brings attention to the (apparently) little used provisions of CPR 35.14.  Experts have the…

CLAIMANT'S QUESTIONS TO DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS DISALLOWED: PART 35 HAS A REQUIREMENT FOR PROPORTIONALITY: EXPERTS SEEK HELP

CLAIMANT’S QUESTIONS TO DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS DISALLOWED: PART 35 HAS A REQUIREMENT FOR PROPORTIONALITY: EXPERTS SEEK HELP

October 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There is another aspect of the judgment of Master Davison in In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) that is of considerable interest.  The Master disallowed a series of lengthy questions to the experts.   The Master pointed out…

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT'S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE  OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT’S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

October 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) Master Davison allowed the claimant to produce as evidence the tapes they had recorded of their consultations with the defendant’s medical experts.   This decision raises some interesting issues. (The case…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 66: THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 66: THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4

October 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

A party seeking to rely on expert evidence requires permission from the court. It is surprising how often the rule requiring the court to be provided with details of the cost of that expert is overlooked. “When parties apply for…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: PARTIES WHO ARE JOINED TO A SPECULATIVE ENTERPRISE IN LITIGATION SHOULD EVALUATE THEIR POSITION WITH CARE

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPEAL AGAINST ORDER FOR INDEMNITY COSTS: PARTIES WHO ARE JOINED TO A SPECULATIVE ENTERPRISE IN LITIGATION SHOULD EVALUATE THEIR POSITION WITH CARE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content

 In  Ford & Anor v Bennett & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1604 the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal against a trial judge’s decision to award indemnity costs.  The judgment contains a lesson to “additional parties” to litigation. “Parties who…

REALISTIC TIME ESTIMATES: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THIS RIGHT

REALISTIC TIME ESTIMATES: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THIS RIGHT

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Written advocacy

There is a short passage in  Barrowfen Properties Ltd v Hambros Investments Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 2548 (Ch) where Chief Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Briggs makes it clear that an application had been given an inadequate time estimate….

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT'S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT’S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This series looks at the question of when, if ever, it is appropriate for a solicitor to swear an affidavit or make a statement in place of the client? This issue was considered by Stanley Burnton J in Bracken Partners…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 65: THAT NIGHTMARE SCENARIO WHERE THE COURT HAS ISSUED THE CLAIM FORM BUT YOU CAN'T SERVE IT

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 65: THAT NIGHTMARE SCENARIO WHERE THE COURT HAS ISSUED THE CLAIM FORM BUT YOU CAN’T SERVE IT

October 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

Here I want to isolate one aspect of the judgment in AAA -v- Rakoff [2019] EWHC 2525 (QB) that was easy to miss amidst all the features of that case.  The fact that the court can issue proceedings and hold onto…

QUICK REMINDER OF NEW COSTS BUDGETING RULES COMING INTO FORCE TODAY: INCURRED COSTS INCLUDE THE COSTS OF THE CCMC

QUICK REMINDER OF NEW COSTS BUDGETING RULES COMING INTO FORCE TODAY: INCURRED COSTS INCLUDE THE COSTS OF THE CCMC

October 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes

Part of the 109th update to the Civil Procedure Rules came into force today.  A quick reminder that, from today, there is a change in the way that the courts approach the costs of the CCMC itself.   INCURRED COSTS…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ISSUES, ANONYMITY, EXPEDITED TRIALS AND ... SPEARMINT RHINO

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM ISSUES, ANONYMITY, EXPEDITED TRIALS AND … SPEARMINT RHINO

September 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I have been meaning to write more about anonymity and civil litigation, in particular  orders made under CPR 16.  This issue arose today in a surprising context in AAA -v- Rakoff [2019] EWHC 2525 (QB).   The case raises issues in…

CPR 3.1 USED, PROPERLY AND EFFICIENTLY, TO KEEP DOWN THE WAITING (AND ANGUISH)

CPR 3.1 USED, PROPERLY AND EFFICIENTLY, TO KEEP DOWN THE WAITING (AND ANGUISH)

September 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Irish & Anor, Re [2019] EWHC 2508 (Ch) HHJ Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) used CPR 3.1 to cut down greatly the time (expense and anguish) in relation to a difficult and sensitive application. “it seemed to…

CIVIL PROCEDURE, COSTS, EVIDENCE AND - DINOSAURS : A REVIEW OF THE MONTH -  ARTICLES AND POSTS (SEPTEMBER 2019)

CIVIL PROCEDURE, COSTS, EVIDENCE AND – DINOSAURS : A REVIEW OF THE MONTH – ARTICLES AND POSTS (SEPTEMBER 2019)

September 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

Every month I plan to provide links to useful articles and posts on civil procedure.   I am happy for anyone to send me links that are relevant to the topics that this blog covers.  (Links to  posts does not constitute…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: FAILURE TO SERVE ANY DEFENDANTS WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION: THE GOOSE IS NOT PROPERLY COOKED...

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: FAILURE TO SERVE ANY DEFENDANTS WHEN APPLYING FOR AN INJUNCTION: THE GOOSE IS NOT PROPERLY COOKED…

September 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Injunctions, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

In Canada Goose UK Retail Ltd v Persons Unknown & Anor [2019] EWHC 2459 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin refused the claimants’ application for an injunction on several grounds. Here we look at the issues relating to service of the claim…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 61: SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 61: SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS

September 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

This post is caused by a search term that led to this blog “similar fact evidence in civil litigation”.   This would be an apposite time to review the principles relating to similar fact evidence and the relevant case law.  …

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

September 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post on the judgment in Baynton-Williams v Baynton-Williams [2019] EWHC 2179 (Ch) gives me a chance to return to a hobby horse – the need to give the source of information and belief when signing a witness statement.  Here…

WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM

WHEN A JUDGE MAKES A WRONG DECISION BECAUSE RELEVANT PAPERS (WHICH HAVE BEEN SENT TO COURT IN GOOD TIME) HAVE NOT REACHED THEM

September 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content

The decision in Singh v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWCA Civ 1504 related to a case where a decision was made when the judge was not given relevant papers that had arrived at court. “In…

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL:  KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE - A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL: KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE – A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

September 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

Appeals are always difficult.  The appellate court has to be persuaded that the first-instance judge was “wrong”, and this is a fairly rigorous test.  It is made far more difficult if the appellate court is given the wrong documents. Particularly…

SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM BY WHATSAPP:  A CASE IN POINT: SERVICE BY SOCIAL MEDIA AND EMAIL

SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM BY WHATSAPP: A CASE IN POINT: SERVICE BY SOCIAL MEDIA AND EMAIL

September 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Gray v Hurley [2019] EWHC 1636 (QB) the court allowed service of the claim form by Whatsapp message. THE CASE The hearing was a dispute about jurisdiction.   The claimant issued proceedings and obtained an order for service on the…

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: DEFENDANT'S SOLICITOR FAILED TO NOTICE THAT PARTICULARS OF CLAIM HAD BEEN SERVED WITH THE CLAIM FORM

SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: DEFENDANT’S SOLICITOR FAILED TO NOTICE THAT PARTICULARS OF CLAIM HAD BEEN SERVED WITH THE CLAIM FORM

September 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

The judgment of HH Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a HIgh Court Judge)  in Praetura Asset Finance Ltd v Hood [2019] EWHC 2231 (Comm) shows how important it is to check what has been served.  The one, overwhelming, lesson for…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 60: INTERIM ORDERS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: "CASH FLOW IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF BUSINESS"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 60: INTERIM ORDERS ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: “CASH FLOW IS THE LIFEBLOOD OF BUSINESS”

September 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

Here we look at the rules relating to interim orders on account of costs, a subject of considerable importance in relation to practitioner’s cash flow and client’s pockets.  CPR 44.2(8) “(8) Where the court orders a party to pay costs…

← Previous 1 … 17 18 19 … 31 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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS…)
  • THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
  • EXPERT WATCH 71: “I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE”: THE EXPERT WAS “ADVOCATING” AND “HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
  • MORE ABOUT THE CASE AGAINST A SOLICITOR BEING STRUCK OUT: THE ABSENCE OF AN ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITY MEANT THERE WAS NO CASE: A CLAIMANT CANNOT HOPE THAT “SOMETHING WILL TURN UP” ON DISCLOSURE…

Top Posts

TUPE DOES NOT PASS ON LIABILITIES TO THIRD PARTIES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
EXPERT WATCH 70: EXPERTS' FAILURES TO REPORT ON THE RANGE OF OPINIONS LEADS TO THEIR VIEWS BEING REJECTED: ESSENTIAL READING FOR EVERY PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYER, ANYONE WHO INSTRUCTS AN EXPERT (AND ANY EXPERT...)
THE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AND ONE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: DECISION TO STRIKE OUT ALLOWED ON APPEAL BECAUSE THE JUDGE HAD WRONGLY CONSIDERED THE MERITS
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (2): HOW TO SPOT "FALSE" AUTHORITIES AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT (PLUS SOME USEFUL LINKS)
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (3): AI AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: VERY DANGEROUS BEDFELLOWS: TWENTY KEY POINTS

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.