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 24

CIVIL COURTS STRUCTURE REVIEW: LINKS

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized

The Civil Courts Structure Review has potentially profound changes to the structure of the civil courts. Here are links to the key documents The report itself is available here The Welcoming Statement is available here  The press summary can be…

NEW EVIDENCE ALLOWED AFTER HEARING: A HIGH COURT DECISION

January 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Swift Advances PLc -v- Ahmed [2015] EWHC 3265 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris permitted new evidence to be adduced after evidence and submissions had been completed. “..it may be expected that courts will allow fresh evidence when to refuse it…

THE DANGERS OF NOT PAYING THE CORRECT COURT FEE: CASES BARRED BY LIMITATION BECAUSE WRONG COURT FEE WAS PAID

January 6, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Richard Lewis & Others -v- Ward Hadaway [2015] EWHC 3503 (Ch) Mr John Male QC   summary judgment was given for the defendants on the grounds that a deliberate decision to pay an incorrect court fee on issue meant…

INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS, A "CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE" AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR JUSTICE

January 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The decision of District Judge Hickman in the small claims case of Thakar -v- The Secretary of State for Justice [2015] EW Misc B44 is one that is likely to attract a lot of attention given that it was a…

USING WITNESS STATEMENTS PREPARED IN ANOTHER ACTION: WHEN IS A "HEARING HELD IN PUBLIC"

January 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

CPR 32.12 prevents witness statements served in an action being used for any other purpose.  However there is an exception when a statement is “put in evidence at a hearing held in public”.  This issue was considered in Kimathi -v- Foreign…

PART 36: WHEN THE NORMAL COSTS PENALTIES MAY NOT APPLY

December 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Yentob -v-MGN Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1292 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the judge not to impose the normal penalties when a claimant failed to beat a Part 36 offer. KEY POINTS When a party fails…

SUPREME SANCTIONS IN THE SUPREME COURT: NO SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY

December 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of the Supreme Court in Thevarajah -v- Riordan [2015] UKSC 78 has been long anticipated since it related to the law relating to sanctions. In fact it is a decision in relation to a very narrow issues.  The…

"TOTALLY HOPELESS" APPLICATION FOR DISCLOSURE;INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS;APPLICATION FOR EXTENSION REFUSED:ALL LEGAL LIFE IS HERE

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in London Borough of Bromley -v- Heckel [2015] EWHC encompasses many of the themes regularly discussed in this blog. Proceedings were issued late;there was an inappropriate application for disclosure;the witness evidence was inadequate. Finally…

NO SPECIAL RULES FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: COSTS DO NOT FOLLOW THE EVENT FOLLOWING UNREASONABLE CONDUCT

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Litigants in person, Members Content, Uncategorized

Master Mathews faced an unusual scenario in Jones -v- Longley [2015] EWHC 3362 (Ch).  This case highlights the fact that litigants in person are not subject to any special rules and are liable to have orders for costs made against…

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS & FAILURE TO MEDIATE: CLAIMANT BEATS OWN OFFER AND COSTS INCREASED BY 10%

December 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The claimant beat its own Part 36 offer on costs in the case of Reid -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B21. Consequently costs were increased by 10% and additional interest accrued. “If the party unwilling to mediate is…

WHEN THE COURT FAILS TO SERVE: AN IRREGULAR JUDGMENT MUST BE SET ASIDE

December 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

In Tanir -v- Tanir [2015] EWHC 3363 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham found that the court had failed to serve the claim form and, consequently, a judgment had to be set aside. The court had no discretion to act otherwise. “The…

LATE EXPERT EVIDENCE, DENTON AND WAVING A FINGER IN THE AIR

December 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The decision of the Court of Appeal in O’Connor -v- The Pennine Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWCA 1244 will receive much attention for the important observations made as to evidence, proof and “res ipsa loquitur”.   However here I want…

CLAIMANT CAN RECOVER COSTS AGAINST A DEFENDANT NOT NAMED IN THE CFA

December 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Engeham -v- London & Quadrant Housing Ltd & Academy of Plumbing Ltd (01/12/2015) * the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a consent order which stated that damages and costs were to be paid by a defendant not named…

BE CAREFUL WHERE YOU SERVE A NOTICE OF COMMENCEMENT: PAYING PARTY ESTOPPED FROM TAKING A POINT AS TO SERVICE

November 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents, Uncategorized

In Edray Ltd -v- Canning [2015] EWHC 2744 (Ch) Stephen Jourdan QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered an issue relating to estoppel and waiver when a Notice of Commencement had not been properly served. “The bill of…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED IN £30 MILLION CASE: NOT ALL SANCTIONS ARE EQUAL

November 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Sinclair -v- Dorsey & Whitney (Mr Justice Popplewell 20/11/2015)* an application for relief from sanctions was refused in a case that the claimant valued at £30 million. THE CASE The claimants had been ordered to provide security for costs….

PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANTS, LAWYERS & SOCIAL MEDIA

November 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Social media is coming to play an increasingly important part in personal injury litigation. It is worthwhile taking a look at developments and the lawyer’s duties.  There is no doubt at all that the close scrutiny of social media accounts…

WHEN TWO RULES COLLIDE:PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT OVERRIDE NEED TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM

November 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Part 36, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In The Former Owners of the Motor Vessel “Melissa K” -v- The Former Owners of the Motor Tanker “Tomsk” [2015] EWHC 3445 (Admlty) Mr Justice Males considered the interplay between Part 36 and the need to serve. It is an…

DID YOU KNOW YOU CAN SUBSCRIBE TO THIS BLOG?

November 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

This blog has a free subscription service whereby each post can be e-mailed to you directly when published. TO SUBSCRIBE On the right hand side of the blog there is a panel. If you scroll down to the bottom you…

GOOD WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE NOT JUST FOR CHANCERY LAWYERS: THE CHANCERY GUIDE TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

November 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links, Witness statements

In a post last week we looked at a comment in the judgment of HHJ Behrens in Royal National Institute for Deaf People -v- Turner [2015] EWHC 3301 Ch which concluded “In so far as there is a criticism of the preparation it…

DEFENDANT NOT ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION AND DEBARRED FROM RELYING ON FURTHER EVIDENCE: PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT

November 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Clark -v- Braintree Clinical Services Limited [2015] EWHC 3181 HH Judge Burrell QC  (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a defendant’s application to resile from an admission. He also granted the claimant’s application to debar the defendant from…

STRIKING OUT FOR DELAY: SOLLAND UPHELD ON APPEAL

November 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

We have looked before at the decision of Master Bowles in Solland International Ltd -v- Clifford Harris & Co [2015] EWHC 2018 (Ch) where the claimant’s action was struck out because of their failure to progress the action for 31…

ISSUING WITHOUT AUTHORITY: THE DANGERS OF SOLICITORS SIGNING STATEMENTS OF TRUTH: ACTION STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

October 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out, Uncategorized

This blog has looked, several times, at the dangers of solicitors signing documents which contain a statement of truth. The risks are clearly set out in the decision of Mrs Justice Rose today in Bao Xiang International Garment Centre -v-…

AN OFFER IS NOT AN ADMISSION: HIGH COURT REJECTS APPLICATION FOR JUDGMENT ON ADMISSIONS

October 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Admissions, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The previous post looked at the decision Mr Justice Coulson in The Dorchester Group Ltd -v- Kier Construction Limited [2015] EWHC 3051 (TCC) in relation to disclosure.  Here we look at the decision in relation to the claimant’s application for…

ADJOURNMENTS AND DISCRETION: DECISION NOT TO ADJOURN BANKRUPTCY PETITION UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

October 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Edginton -v- Sekhon [2015] EWCA Civ 816 the Court of Appeal refused to overturn the judge’s decision not to adjourn a bankruptcy petition. “Delay is inimical to all forms of litigation and especially so in a collective enforcement process…

SUING OR DEFENDING ON BEHALF OF AN ESTATE OR TRUST FUND: DID YOU KNOW YOUR COSTS BUDGETS MUST BE FILED WITH THE PLEADINGS?

October 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

A solicitor has pointed out to me the surprise provisions of Practice Direction 3F – on Costs Capping.  The title of  the Practice Directions is deceptive. There are also mandatory provisions in relation to the filing of costs budgets at…

WHEN LAW AND POLITICS COLLIDE : IT'S ALL ABOUT SERVICE

October 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

It is rare for cases about service of the claim form to reach the headlines. This, however, is what happened in Ireland -v- Dorries [2015] EWHC 2781 (QB). Although service here relates to service of an Election Petition the court…

REFUSAL TO REALLOCATE: DISTRICT JUDGES WILL NOT ACT AS THE "COURT OF APPEAL" IN ALLOCATION DECISIONS

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Williams -v- Santander UK PLC [2015] EW Misc B37(CC) District Judge Stamenkovich considered an application to re-allocate a case from the small claims track. “I can see no reason to sit as a Court of Appeal from my fellow…

IS THIS A PART 36 OFFER I SEE BEFORE ME? THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Justice Morgan in Tim-Alexander Gunther Nikolaus Hertel -v- Artemis International Sarl [2015] EWHC 2848 (Ch) involves a complex set of facts but is  extremely important in terms of construction of Part 36 offers. (It is perhaps…

STRIKING OUT AT TRIAL BECAUSE THE CASE WAS A MESS: A WARNING FOR THOSE WHO WANT LIFE WITHOUT LAWYERS

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

On a day when the Lord Chief Justice has stated that the legal system must adapt to life without lawyers. It is interesting to read this report of the problems caused by litigants in person. It has kindly been provided…

CASE STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO GIVE DISCLOSURE IN RELATION TO LATER ACCIDENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

October 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Uncategorized

In Ali -v- CIS General Insurance 2015 WL 5037781 His Honour Judge Cryan upheld a decision striking out a claim for failure to comply with disclosure. “The failure to comply with the order for disclosure was a serious failure to…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1st OCTOBER 2015: MEET PRECEDENT Q

September 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

A reminder that there are new rules coming into force today, together with some changes to the Practice Directions. WHERE TO FIND THEM The civil procedure rules are here The amendments to the Practice Directions are here 81st Update PD Making…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM; RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND CHALLENGING THE JURISDICTION: A COMPLEX MIX?

September 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

The decision of Judge Hacon in Cant -v- Hertz Corporation [2015] EWHC 2617 (Ch) raises some interesting issues.  However, equally interesting, are the issues that were not addressed. In particular the issues relating to the applicability of CPR Part 11…

LATE AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS: A RELATIVE CONCEPT: HAGUE PLANT APPLIED

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

When is an application to amend pleadings made late, more particularly too late? This is something we have looked at several times before.  It was considered by H.H. Judge Keyser Q.C. in Hamizay Limited -v- Robin Swailes [2015] EWHC B14(Ch)….

BANKRUPTCY OF CLAIMANT DID NOT RENDER ACTION INVALID OR AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

August 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Eaton -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC (30th April 2015) (reported today on Bailli) His Honour Judge Keyser QC had to consider the effect of bankruptcy upon the validity of a claim. “It is remarkable that the case had proceeded…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 2: LOSER PAYS ALL APPLIES: MOORE IS NOT LESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In The London Borough of Tower Hamlets -v- The London Borough of Bromley [2015] EWHC 2271 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris refused an application for an issue based order and made an order for costs under the general rule that the…

COSTS & CONDUCT 1: MULTIPLE PARTIES, "BULLOCK" AND "SANDERSON" ORDERS AND INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE DEFENDANTS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are several cases today where the courts have considered the issue of where costs should fall and how judicial discretion should be exercised.  The first we consider is Asghar -v- Ahmad [2015] EWHC 2234 (QB) a decision of Mr…

THE PRIMACY OF ORAL TESTIMONY: ABSENT WITNESSES ORDERED TO ATTEND AND LATE AMENDMENTS REFUSED: ALL IN ONE CASE

July 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is an interesting report of two separate decisions of Mr Justice Peter Smith in Harb -v- HRH Price Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdul Aziz [2015] EWHC 2195 (Ch). This relates to two decisions made on the first day…

NEW RULES RELATING TO "NEUTRAL EVALUATION" ; LITIGANTS IN PERSON; ASSESSMENT; SPECIALIST FINANCIAL LIST (AND MORE…)

July 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

New rules have been introduced which (for the most part) come into force on the 1st October 2015.  Here we look at the key changes. THE RULES The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.4) Rules 2014 were laid before Parliament on the…

EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO COMPLY WITH CONSENT ORDER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

July 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Safin (Fursecroft) Limited -v- The Estate of Dr Said Ahmed Said Badrig (deceased) [2015] EWCA Civ 739 the Court of Appeal considered the principles relating to extensions of time of a consent order. KEY POINTS The Court has the…

ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: IS IT VALID? A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION

July 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The question of whether a witness statement can be signed electronically is often described as an “open” issue. It was considered by District Judge Jenkinson in Fitzpatrick -v- AIG Europe Ltd (Liverpool County Court 1st July 2015*). THE CASE The…

PREVIOUS COSTS ORDERS STAND EVEN AFTER DISCONTINUANCE: A HIGH COURT DECISION

June 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Company -v- Al Refai [2015] EWHC 1793 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Smith considered whether discontinuance of an action should have an effect on previous costs orders. THE CASE The claimants had agreed terms of…

SETTING ASIDE AN EARLIER ORDER: A WIDE AND UNFETTERED DISCRETION?

June 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Judgment, Members Content

In Cole -v- Howlett [2015] EWHC 1697 (Ch) Mr Justice Peter Smith conducted detailed consideration of the power, and discretion, to review and set aside orders already made.  The judge agreed to set aside his earlier order striking out the…

LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS: DON'T GO TO COLLEGE – JUST READ THE RULES

June 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In R (on the application of the London College of Finance & Accounting) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1688 (Admin) Mr Justice Cobb made some important observations in relation to the late service of evidence…

ANOTHER MIS-SERVED CLAIM FORM: CLAIMANTS DO NOT PASS GO AND DO NOT GET TO THE BANK

June 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

There are a number of issues considered by Mr Justice Arnold in Chopra -v- Bank of Singapore [2015] EWHC 1549 (Ch).  However the claimants failed at the very first, and very familiar, hurdle – service of the claim form. THE…

PHONE HACKING, MISSING DOCUMENTS AND THE ABSENT WITNESS: IMPORTANT ISSUES OF CIVIL EVIDENCE

June 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The issues raised in the “phone hacking” trial are well known. However Mr Justice Mann also made some important observations about civil evidence. In particular the inferences to be drawn when witnesses are not called or evidence not available. These…

HELL IT WAS IN "THAT FEBRILE TIME": OSTRICHES, MITCHELL, DENTON AND THE "BRILLIANT READJUSTMENT"

May 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There are some interesting observations made by Lord Dyson MR in The English Experience of Access to Justice Reform. In particular the look back at the “febrile” atmosphere that Mitchell created and the rationale of the subsequent “revision” in Denton….

PERMISSION TO CALL EXPERT WITNESS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

May 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

I cannot recall the last time an appeal took place in relation to the question of permission to call an expert witness.  The post yesterday discussed a case where permission to call an expert was upheld.  Hot on its heels…

INDEMNITY COSTS AND REDUCED INTEREST ON DAMAGES BECAUSE OF DELAY: COURTS WILL STAY ON THE RAILS

May 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Interest, Members Content

There is a short interesting judgment by Mr Justice Akenhead  in Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd -v- Handy [2015] EWHC 1460 (TCC) which deals with the principles relating to indemnity costs and interest. A further interesting point is that the claimant…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ORDER STRIKING OUT CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO SERVE EXPERT REPORT: DON'T PARK THE LORRY WHEN THE TIDE IS AGAINST YOU

May 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Elliott -v- Stobart Group Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 449 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out an application for damages because of a failure to serve a medical report. “In my judgment Judge Platts was correct…

VERY IMPORTANT DECISION ON PART 36 OFFERS, ASSESSMENT OF COSTS AND ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS WHEN OFFERS NOT BEATEN

May 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The decision of Mrs Justice Slade DBE in Cashman -v- Mid Essex Hospital Services NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1312 (QB) deals with the additional sums that a party may have to pay when it fails to beat a Part 36 offer….

← Previous 1 … 23 24 25 … 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 440: WHY INDEMNITY COSTS WERE ORDERED A LOOK AT THE CLAIMANTS’ PLEADED CASE: FIRSTLY IT WAS PLEADED TOO WIDELY, SECONDLY THERE WERE THEN ATTEMPTS TO PUT THE CASE OUTSIDE THE PLEADINGS
  • CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINARS COMING UP LATER THIS YEAR: A NEW DISCOUNT CODE
  • COST BITES 439 : IS THE EXISTENCE OF A COSTS BUDGET A REASON NOT TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS ?
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE RELEVANCE OF THE CLIENTS BEING SOLELY AT FAULT: SOME DIFFICULT ISSUES TO TACKLE
  • COST BITES 438 : CLAIMANT’S UNTENABLE ARGUMENTS LEADS TO REDUCTION IN COSTS RECOVERED: HOURLY RATES FAR TOO HIGH, EVEN WHEN THE CLAIM WAS “ONLY” FOR £9 MILLION

Top Posts

EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY "WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT" TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS
COST BITES 437: SHOULD THE DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT OF THE ACTION LEAD TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING AWARDED? YES IT SHOULD...
ANOTHER INTERESTING DISCUSSION (ABOUT INTEREST...): THE STARTING POINT IS THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR BEING OUT OF ITS MONEY (NO MATTER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE DONE WITH IT...)
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: RED FLAGS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS (1): THE WITNESS THAT GIVES THE COURT THEIR OPINION

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