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 21
COST BUDGETING: THE PARTIES MUST KNOW WHERE THEY STAND: LEAVING HOURLY RATES "OPEN" IS INAPPROPRIATE

COST BUDGETING: THE PARTIES MUST KNOW WHERE THEY STAND: LEAVING HOURLY RATES “OPEN” IS INAPPROPRIATE

November 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

I am grateful  Sam Hayman from Bolt Burdon Kemp to for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Jacobs in Yirenki -v- Ministry of Defence [2018] EWHC 3102 (QB).  The judge allowed an appeal against a cost budgeting…

ANOTHER CASE OF SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM GOING AWRY: GO ON - DICE WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH: WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?

ANOTHER CASE OF SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM GOING AWRY: GO ON – DICE WITH PROCEDURAL DEATH: WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG?

November 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

When lecturing at the Zenith Chambers personal injury course this Thursday I only offered one prediction for civil procedure: “I’ll be here next year talking about claim form cases reported over the previous 12 months where things have gone wrong.” …

A HAPPY READER WRITES: WHEN BLOG POSTS ARE READ A ZILLION TIMES...

A HAPPY READER WRITES: WHEN BLOG POSTS ARE READ A ZILLION TIMES…

November 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

a As a blogger feedback comes in many forms.  Yesterday I had an email from a litigant in person.  The method described may well become more prevalent. THE EMAIL “Mr Exall, I wrote to you this time last year with…

ACTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: DENTON PRINCIPLES NOT ENGAGED IN FAILING TO SERVE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND MEDICAL REPORT

ACTION SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: DENTON PRINCIPLES NOT ENGAGED IN FAILING TO SERVE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND MEDICAL REPORT

November 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In the judgment today in  Mark v Universal Coatings & Services Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 3206 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer allowed an appeal against an action being struck out.  The case has many procedural complexities.  Here we look at…

THE DANGERS OF PLEADING DISHONESTY: PART OF REPLY TO DEFENCE STRUCK OUT

THE DANGERS OF PLEADING DISHONESTY: PART OF REPLY TO DEFENCE STRUCK OUT

November 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Canary Riverside Estate Management Ltd v Circus Apartments Ltd [2018] EWHC 1376 (Ch) Master Shuman provides an succinct summary of the principles relating to pleading dishonesty.  Part of a Reply that alleged dishonesty was struck out. THE CASE The claimant…

APPLYING FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 14 KEY POINTS TO HELP EASE THE STRAIN

APPLYING FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 14 KEY POINTS TO HELP EASE THE STRAIN

November 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

There was a nice tweet earlier today from pupil barrister Miranda Grell explaining she had just appeared in her first relief from sanctions application and had found this blog useful.  This reminded me that it may be a good time…

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE'S REPORT 2018: SELECTED EXTRACTS

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE’S REPORT 2018: SELECTED EXTRACTS

November 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Lord Chief Justice’s Report for 2018 is available if you follow the link here. Much of it is important.  I have selected extracts that may be of particular interest to litigators.  (There is an argument that some key indicators that…

YOU CANNOT ARGUE A "NEW" CASE AT THE APPEAL STAGE: "RACING" DRIVERS NOT INVOLVED IN A CRIMINAL JOINT ENTERPRISE: FATAL ACCIDENT ACT DAMAGES AWARDED

YOU CANNOT ARGUE A “NEW” CASE AT THE APPEAL STAGE: “RACING” DRIVERS NOT INVOLVED IN A CRIMINAL JOINT ENTERPRISE: FATAL ACCIDENT ACT DAMAGES AWARDED

November 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In Wallett & Ors v Vickers [2018] EWHC 3088 (QB) Mr Justice Males overturned a decision in favour of the defendant and awarded damages to the estate of a deceased driver. The important procedural issue is that the defendant were not…

LIVE COURT OF APPEAL STREAMING - GIVES YOU A GRANDSTAND SEAT

LIVE COURT OF APPEAL STREAMING – GIVES YOU A GRANDSTAND SEAT

November 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Advocacy, Appeals, Members Content

The Court of Appeal pilot scheme for live streaming will start on Thursday, details are available on the Court and Tribunals Judiciary website. THE FIRST MATCH… The first case to be heard  with live streaming concerns West Ham United football…

THE DANGERS OF BEING "BULLISH" ON PROCEDURAL ISSUES: APPLICATION DISMISSED (AND IT TOOK TOO LONG)

THE DANGERS OF BEING “BULLISH” ON PROCEDURAL ISSUES: APPLICATION DISMISSED (AND IT TOOK TOO LONG)

November 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Witness statements

In Red Bull GmbH v Big Horn UK Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2794 (Ch) Master Clark completed the judgment”I conclude by noting the regrettable extent to which this judgment has been lengthened by the determination of the procedural points of…

SIX YEARS ON: YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CASE YOU WANT TO PLEAD: CLAIMANT'S ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO PARTICULARISE CASE

SIX YEARS ON: YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CASE YOU WANT TO PLEAD: CLAIMANT’S ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO PARTICULARISE CASE

November 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

The judgment of HHJ Platts in Wrightson -v- Flor Projects Limited [2018] EWHC 3036 (QB) provides, amongst other things, an important warning on the need to plead and particularise a case properly.  The case shows that when a claimant has…

REVEALING THE TRUE IDENTITY OF A WITNESS IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: APPLICATION FOR ANONYMITY SCUTTLED

REVEALING THE TRUE IDENTITY OF A WITNESS IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: APPLICATION FOR ANONYMITY SCUTTLED

November 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In the judgment today in  Suez Fortune Investments Ltd & Anor v Talbot Underwriting Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2929 (Comm) Mr Justice Teare allowed an application by the defendants that the true identity of a witness be disclosed.  The witness…

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHY YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS NEED REGULAR REMINDERS OF THE RULES & CASES

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHY YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS NEED REGULAR REMINDERS OF THE RULES & CASES

November 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill made some important observations that apply to every aspect of litigation.  We looked at the case yesterday: a stark reminder was provided of the dangers…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE

October 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The post earlier today on the deficiencies in a witness statement  that led to it being excluded provides a good opportunity to reprise certain key points.  Not only was the excluded statement essentially “commentary” and “opinion” it also failed to…

WITNESS STATEMENT EXCLUDED BECAUSE IT WAS OF NO USE: THE DANGERS OF NOT KNOWING THE RULES RELATING TO WITNESS EVIDENCE

WITNESS STATEMENT EXCLUDED BECAUSE IT WAS OF NO USE: THE DANGERS OF NOT KNOWING THE RULES RELATING TO WITNESS EVIDENCE

October 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

I have noted, many times, on this blog the dangerous tendency of some practitioners to conflate witness statements with submissions.  Witness statements express opinions, comments on documents and the law and do not give the source of information and belief. …

TRYING TO APPEAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT IS VERY DIFFICULT - AND THE TCC IS NO DIFFERENT TO OTHER COURTS

TRYING TO APPEAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: IT IS VERY DIFFICULT – AND THE TCC IS NO DIFFERENT TO OTHER COURTS

October 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Lord Justice Coulson used the judgment in Wheeldon Brothers Waste Ltd v Millennium Insurance Company Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2403 to remind (some) litigators of  some key principles in relation to appeals on findings of fact.   He emphasised that the Technology…

NON COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: STRIKING OUT; LATE ATTEMPTS TO COMPLY; LATE "ACCEPTANCE" OF PART 36 OFFERS AND NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

NON COMPLIANCE WITH PEREMPTORY ORDERS: STRIKING OUT; LATE ATTEMPTS TO COMPLY; LATE “ACCEPTANCE” OF PART 36 OFFERS AND NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Part 36, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Sanctions, Serving documents, Striking out

In Devoy-Williams -v- High Cartwright & Amin [2018] EWHC 2815 (Ch) Mrs Justice Falk upheld a decision that an action was struck out and that relief from sanctions should not be granted. It is a reminder (amongst other things)  of…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR'S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE - THREE TIMES

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR’S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE – THREE TIMES

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In  Lyons v Fox Williams LLP [2018] EWCA Civ 2347 the Court of Appeal turned down the claimant’s appeal.  The claimant had been unsuccessful in an action for professional negligence against a firm of solicitors. He was equally unsuccessful on appeal….

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: DO YOU KNOW ABOUT CPR 32.5(4): "LATE EVIDENCE" SHOULD BE HARD TO ADDUCE

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: DO YOU KNOW ABOUT CPR 32.5(4): “LATE EVIDENCE” SHOULD BE HARD TO ADDUCE

October 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Witness statements

In the judgment today in The Catholic Child Welfare Society (Diocese of Middlesbrough) & Ors v CD [2018] EWCA Civ 2342 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against a claimant being successful in a Section 33 application.  There is an…

CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING: SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO? PROCEEDINGS NOT DELAYED BECAUSE THERE ARE PENDING APPEALS

CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING: SHOULD WE STAY OR SHOULD WE GO? PROCEEDINGS NOT DELAYED BECAUSE THERE ARE PENDING APPEALS

October 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Costs, Members Content

In Sberbank of Russia v The OJSC International Bank of Azerbaijan [2018] EWHC 2777 (Comm)Mr Justice Bryan had to consider whether to adjourn a case management conference pending appeals in other cases.  The judge considered the overriding objective and held that…

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…

← Previous 1 … 20 21 22 … 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.