Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Civil Procedure
DELAY BY THE CLAIMANT WAS NOT "WAREHOUSING" AND DID NOT LEAD TO A STRIKE OUT: A PARTY ALLEGING DELAY WAS ABUSE MUST ACT PROMPTLY

DELAY BY THE CLAIMANT WAS NOT “WAREHOUSING” AND DID NOT LEAD TO A STRIKE OUT: A PARTY ALLEGING DELAY WAS ABUSE MUST ACT PROMPTLY

February 2, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Striking out

There are several significant aspects to the judgment of Mr Justice Eyre in Morgan Sindall Construction and Infrastructure Ltd v Capita Property and Infrastructure (Structures) Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 166 (TCC). Firstly the distinction between proceedings issued for the…

"INTERROGATION" OF A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS EXCESSIVE: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

“INTERROGATION” OF A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS EXCESSIVE: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY

January 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure

We have seen many cases relating to issues arising following the sending out of draft judgments.  Another example can be viewed in the Court of Appeal judgment today in C & Ors, Re (Care Proceedings: Fact-Finding) [2023] EWCA Civ 38…

COST BITES 49: ARE THE COSTS OF A MEDICAL AGENCY RECOVERABLE IN THE FIXED COSTS REGIME? DISTRICT JUDGE FINDS THAT THEY ARE

January 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Experts, Fixed Costs

Are the costs of a medical agency recoverable under the fixed costs regime? I am grateful to barrister John Meehan for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Phillips in Wilkinson-Mulvaney -v- UK Insurance Ltd (19th January…

MAKING A MISTAKE ON THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL IS NOT NECESSARILY AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: AN APPLICATION THAT PROVED COSTLY FOR THE DEFENDANT

MAKING A MISTAKE ON THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL IS NOT NECESSARILY AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: AN APPLICATION THAT PROVED COSTLY FOR THE DEFENDANT

January 24, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Striking out

I am grateful to Express Solicitors  for sending me a report of a decision in Oxford County Court relating to the Damages Claim Portal. The claimant had used the Portal to issue against the Crown.  The Portal cannot be used…

WHAT THEY DON’T TEACH YOU IN LAW SCHOOL: A REPRISE : EARLY MORNING STARTS AND LEGAL CHEEK STARTED A SERIES

January 13, 2023 · by gexall · in Useful links, Well being

Back in the dim and distant days of 2017 I wrote a series “What they don’t teach you at law school”.  The series also got a lot of input from other lawyers.  This seems a good time to reprise the…

COMMENTING ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT - WHEN THE JUDGE HAS ASKED YOU TO: THE CIRCULATION OF A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT THE END OF THE BEGINNING OF THE LITIGATION BUT THE BEGINNING OF THE END

COMMENTING ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT – WHEN THE JUDGE HAS ASKED YOU TO: THE CIRCULATION OF A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT THE END OF THE BEGINNING OF THE LITIGATION BUT THE BEGINNING OF THE END

January 13, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Conditional Fee Agreements, Uncategorized

There have been several cases over the years where judges have commented on the practice of parties attempting to rewrite draft judgments. In Energy Works (Hull) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 3275 (TCC)…

COST BITES 45: COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION THAT CASE INVOLVING A CHILD BE BUDGETED: ACCEPTS CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON COSTS - BUT NOT THE AMOUNT CLAIMED

COST BITES 45: COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION THAT CASE INVOLVING A CHILD BE BUDGETED: ACCEPTS CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON COSTS – BUT NOT THE AMOUNT CLAIMED

January 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Personal Injury

In CXS v Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 14 (KB) Master Cook considered issues relating to costs in a case concerning a child where the matter is unlikely to be resolved for many years.  The Master rejected…

PROVING THINGS 245: DEFENDANTS FLOORED: THEY FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT DISCLOSURE GIVEN INADVERTENTLY "ON THIS QUESTION, THE EVIDENCE BEFORE ME FROM THE DEFENDANTS IS LIMITED AND UNSATISFACTORY"

PROVING THINGS 245: DEFENDANTS FLOORED: THEY FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT DISCLOSURE GIVEN INADVERTENTLY “ON THIS QUESTION, THE EVIDENCE BEFORE ME FROM THE DEFENDANTS IS LIMITED AND UNSATISFACTORY”

January 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Witness statements

In Flowcrete UK Ltd & Ors v Vebro Polymers UK Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 22 (Comm) Mr Nigel Cooper KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused the defendants’ application to prevent the claimant from using certain documents that…

COST BITES 44: THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF CONDUCT, ARE PART 36 OFFERS SIGNIFICANT?

COST BITES 44: THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF CONDUCT, ARE PART 36 OFFERS SIGNIFICANT?

January 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Part 36

We are returning to the judgment of Mrs Justice Stacey in TRX v Southampton Football Club [2022] EWHC 3392 (KB).  The judge made some observations in relation to the costs of the assessment process.  In particular the interplay of CPR 47.20…

HOW TO CALCULATE TIME IN THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES

HOW TO CALCULATE TIME IN THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES

August 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure

Periodically I write reminders of the importance of being able to calculate time periods correctly. Sometime a miscalculation can lead to fundamental problems. AN EXAMPLE OF MISCALCULATION In Evans v Pinsent Masons LLP [2019] EWHC 2150 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer overturned…

"KAFKAESQUE" PROCEDURAL ISSUE RESOLVED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: A "TANGLE" AND A "MUDDLE"

“KAFKAESQUE” PROCEDURAL ISSUE RESOLVED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL: A “TANGLE” AND A “MUDDLE”

August 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil Procedure

In Anwer v Central Bridging Loans Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 201 the Court of Appeal resolved procedural issues which it described as a “muddle” and “kafkaesque”.  The issue was a simple one of whether a litigant was entitled to transcripts…

PERSUADING THE JUDGE TO CHANGE THEIR MIND AFTER JUDGMENT CAN BE AN EXPENSIVE STEP: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

PERSUADING THE JUDGE TO CHANGE THEIR MIND AFTER JUDGMENT CAN BE AN EXPENSIVE STEP: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

August 4, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure

We have looked, many times, at issues relating to procedure after the handing down of a draft judgment. The Court of Appeal judgment in George v Cannell & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 1067 highlights one of the difficulties that arise. …

APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS "FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS"

APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS “FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS”

July 19, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Coronavirus, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts

In North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group v E (Covid Vaccination) (Rev1) [2022] EWCOP 15 Mr Justice Poole disallowed an application by a respondent in relation to expert evidence.  The expert had been instructed without compliance with the procedural rules in…

TOO MANY CLAIMANTS SPOIL THE CLAIM FORM: THREE STRIKES ... AND YOU'RE OUT

TOO MANY CLAIMANTS SPOIL THE CLAIM FORM: THREE STRIKES … AND YOU’RE OUT

July 15, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Personal Injury

In Abbott & 3,499 Ors v Ministry of Defence [2022] EWHC 1807 (QB) Master Davison rejected the claimant’s arguments that it was permissible to issue 3,500 disparate claims on one claim.  The matters had a common defendant, and some common…

A DEFENDANT WHO DOES NOT ATTEND TRIAL CANNOT SIMPLY TURN THE CLOCK BACK: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES APPLICATION UNDER CPR 39.3

July 13, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Relief from sanctions

In Mabrouk v Murray [2022] EWCA Civ 960 the Court of Appeal refused the defendant’s application for permission to appeal in a case where the defendant failed to attend the trial.   The Court of Appeal dismissed the application under CPR…

A COURT ORDER IS A SERIOUS, NOT TRIVIAL, MATTER: A PARTY IN BREACH CANNOT ACT AS IF THE ORDER HAD NEVER BEEN MADE: "THAT SHIP HAS SAILED".

A COURT ORDER IS A SERIOUS, NOT TRIVIAL, MATTER: A PARTY IN BREACH CANNOT ACT AS IF THE ORDER HAD NEVER BEEN MADE: “THAT SHIP HAS SAILED”.

July 12, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure

One of the most imprudent things to do in litigation is to let a court order be made, not comply and then respond by arguing that the order should never have been made anyway.  We see an example of this…

RESPONDENTS TO AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: YOU SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY WRITTEN A LETTER AND SAVED YOURSELVES £67,000

RESPONDENTS TO AN APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL: YOU SHOULD HAVE SIMPLY WRITTEN A LETTER AND SAVED YOURSELVES £67,000

July 8, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Costs, Wasted Costs

In over three decades of writing about civil procedure I cannot recall any cases about costs following a permission to appeal hearing. There are now two cases this week.  In Kerseviciene v Quadri & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1757 (QB)…

FIXED COSTS OUSTED WHEN THE PARTIES AGREE COSTS ARE TO BE THE SUBJECT OF A DETAILED ASSESSMENT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

FIXED COSTS OUSTED WHEN THE PARTIES AGREE COSTS ARE TO BE THE SUBJECT OF A DETAILED ASSESSMENT: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

July 8, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Personal Injury

In the judgment today in Doyle -v- M&D Foundations & Building Services Limited [2022] EWCA CIV 927 the Court of Appeal found that it was possible for parties to contract out of the fixed costs provisions of the protocols. THE…

MORE ABOUT THE CLAIMS PORTAL: AMENDMENTS RELATING TO LEGAL PROFESSIONALS RESPONDING TO CLAIM IS NOW REVOKED: KEEP UP TO DATE WITH TWITTER...

MORE ABOUT THE CLAIMS PORTAL: AMENDMENTS RELATING TO LEGAL PROFESSIONALS RESPONDING TO CLAIM IS NOW REVOKED: KEEP UP TO DATE WITH TWITTER…

June 1, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Rule Changes

Another tweet from HMSCTS clarifies the position in relation to defendant’s compulsory use of the claims portal which was discussed yesterday. It appears that the amendments relating to legal professionals responding to claims has not simply been postponed, but this…

ANOTHER CASE WHERE JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS WERE ISSUED IN LONDON BUT IT WAS TRANSFERRED TO LEEDS

ANOTHER CASE WHERE JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS WERE ISSUED IN LONDON BUT IT WAS TRANSFERRED TO LEEDS

May 30, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure

In  Fajr Ellis, R (On the Application Of) v Student Loans Company [2022] EWHC 1263 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham held that judicial review proceedings, issued in London, should be transferred to the administrative court in Leeds.   “In my judgment…

1 2 … 20 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2023. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 31,037 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FOUND WHEN AN INVOICE WAS DOCTORED: NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE SAID WITH FLOWERS
  • ITS OFFICIAL – THE BEST COSTS ADVICE YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER: READ IT HERE: CONTEST WINNER
  • DELAY BY THE CLAIMANT WAS NOT “WAREHOUSING” AND DID NOT LEAD TO A STRIKE OUT: A PARTY ALLEGING DELAY WAS ABUSE MUST ACT PROMPTLY
  • UNDERSTANDING THE LAW RELATING TO FATAL ACCIDENTS: WEBINAR 8th FEBRUARY 2023
  • CLAIMANT FAILS IN AN APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS AGAINST HIS OWN LAWYERS: HOWEVER THERE IS AN IMPORTANT LESSON HERE

Top Posts & Pages

  • ITS OFFICIAL - THE BEST COSTS ADVICE YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER: READ IT HERE: CONTEST WINNER
  • CLAIMANT FAILS IN AN APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS AGAINST HIS OWN LAWYERS: HOWEVER THERE IS AN IMPORTANT LESSON HERE
  • NO DUTY ON A PARTY TO INFORM AN OPPOSING PARTY THEY ARE MAKING AN ERROR: THE APPEAL JUDGMENT IN PHOENIX IN FULL:
  • WHAT IS THE BEST COSTS ADVICE YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER? THE ENTRIES
  • FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FOUND WHEN AN INVOICE WAS DOCTORED: NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE SAID WITH FLOWERS

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2023 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin