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
ASSESSORS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN ADMIRALTY CASES: WHY WERE THEY NECESSARY? APPELLANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED FROM THAT SINKING FEELING ...

ASSESSORS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN ADMIRALTY CASES: WHY WERE THEY NECESSARY? APPELLANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED FROM THAT SINKING FEELING …

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I don’t know if there are many shipping lawyers who read this site. Here we have a very niche part of a judgment in relation to  Admiralty Court procedure.  The appeal was originally adjourned because there appeared to be a…

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: THE SOLICITORS CONDUCT WAS A "MATTER OF VERY REAL CONCERN"  - BUT THE APPLICATION WAS GRANTED

DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: THE SOLICITORS CONDUCT WAS A “MATTER OF VERY REAL CONCERN” – BUT THE APPLICATION WAS GRANTED

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Applications to withdraw from admissions often give rise to controversy.  Here a defendant to a clinical negligence made such an application very late and on the grounds that there had been a change of expert and thus a change of…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM "FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT": THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM “FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT”: THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Here we look at a case where an unrepresented litigant’s action against five defendants was struck out because the Particulars of Claim did not show any legally recognisable case against any of the defendants. This judgment shows the importance of…

THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have seen examples of barristers getting into difficulties because of the misuse of AI.  The Bar Standards Handbook  gives 14 pages of useful guidance to the Bar. I have attempted to summarise the guidance here and provide some useful…

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 2: GUIDANCE AND CHECKLISTS ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM OTHER SOURCES...)

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 2: GUIDANCE AND CHECKLISTS ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM OTHER SOURCES…)

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is clear from recent developments that the use of AI can be useful in litigation, however it can also lead to major problems.  The new SRA Guidance recognises the issues in relation to the need to supervise AI use,…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 16: A TRIAL ALL ABOUT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 16: A TRIAL ALL ABOUT CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

For many years this blog has taken a particular interest in cases about contributory negligence.   This partly because the issue is not dealt with in detail in many places and secondly because of the major practical consequences contributory negligence can…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT ARE THE RULES IF A COURT ORDER DOES NOT STATE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN ORDER FOR COSTS?

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT ARE THE RULES IF A COURT ORDER DOES NOT STATE A SPECIFIC DATE FOR THE PAYMENT OF AN ORDER FOR COSTS?

June 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Sometimes it may appear that this series is a bit too “basic”, dealing with things that (surely) everyone involves in litigation knows. However, more often than not, the topics are chosen because recent events have show that there is a…

WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A WITNESS STATEMENT FOR THEIR CLIENT: THEY MAY BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE, BUT IT IS A VERY DIFFERENT MATTER TO PROVIDING EVIDENCE FROM SOMEONE WITH DIRECT RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE

WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A WITNESS STATEMENT FOR THEIR CLIENT: THEY MAY BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE, BUT IT IS A VERY DIFFERENT MATTER TO PROVIDING EVIDENCE FROM SOMEONE WITH DIRECT RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE

June 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the second post on witness evidence and the preparation of witness statements today. It is in a very different context to the first.  Here we look at a case in the Intellectual Property List where a judge considered…

A CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION FOR AN ANONYMITY ORDER AND THE APPLICATION TO BE HEARD IN PRIVATE WAS REFUSED

A CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN ANONYMITY ORDER AND THE APPLICATION TO BE HEARD IN PRIVATE WAS REFUSED

June 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This is a case where the principles relating to anonymity orders and private hearings were considered in detail.  The claimants applications was largely refused. The only concession being a restriction on disclosure of the claimant’s address.  It is important (if…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: WHEN A CLAIMANT FAILED TO PROVE ANY LOSS AND ATTEMPTED TO USE A LAY WITNESS AS AN EXPERT (JUNE 2018):"THERE IS NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE OF ANY LOSS"

THROWBACK FRIDAY: WHEN A CLAIMANT FAILED TO PROVE ANY LOSS AND ATTEMPTED TO USE A LAY WITNESS AS AN EXPERT (JUNE 2018):”THERE IS NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE OF ANY LOSS”

June 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

We have seen recent examples of cases where parties have failed to prove that they have suffered any loss.   The attempts by lay witnesses to give “expert” evidence is also a recurrent theme in this blog. Here we go back…

SERVICE POINTS 46: A CLAIMANT WHO HAS NOT SERVED THE CLAIM FORM IN TIME CANNOT RELY ON CPR 6.15 OR 6.16: ANOTHER ACTION COMES TO GRIEF...

SERVICE POINTS 46: A CLAIMANT WHO HAS NOT SERVED THE CLAIM FORM IN TIME CANNOT RELY ON CPR 6.15 OR 6.16: ANOTHER ACTION COMES TO GRIEF…

June 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This case emphasises a number of important points about service: (1) There is always a duty on a claimant to serve the claim form in time, no matter what type of proceedings; (2) when a claim form has not been…

PARTS OF A DEFENCE WERE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO REARGUE FACTUAL ISSUES THAT HAD BEEN DETERMINED BY A TRIBUNAL

PARTS OF A DEFENCE WERE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO REARGUE FACTUAL ISSUES THAT HAD BEEN DETERMINED BY A TRIBUNAL

June 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

Here we have a case where parts of a defence were struck out, in relation to two of the claimants, because of issue estoppel. The defence was trying to re-argue factual issues which had already been determined by a tribunal. …

THE COURT PREVENTED THE DEFENDANTS FROM MAKING ANY FURTHER APPLICATIONS IN THE CASE UNTIL THEY HAD COMPLIED WITH PREVIOUS COURT ORDERS: A PROPORTIONATE USE OF THE COURT'S CASE MANAGEMENT POWERS

THE COURT PREVENTED THE DEFENDANTS FROM MAKING ANY FURTHER APPLICATIONS IN THE CASE UNTIL THEY HAD COMPLIED WITH PREVIOUS COURT ORDERS: A PROPORTIONATE USE OF THE COURT’S CASE MANAGEMENT POWERS

June 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we have a case where the court considered, in detail, the appropriate response of the court when a party had failed to comply with previous court orders as to payment of costs.  The result was that the defendants in…

"ADVOCACY - THE JUDGE'S VIEW": SOME RECAPS BEFORE THE START OF A NEW SERIES: SERIES 1 REVIEWED:  (AND WHY THIS IS RELEVANT TO EVERY LITIGATOR...)

“ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW”: SOME RECAPS BEFORE THE START OF A NEW SERIES: SERIES 1 REVIEWED: (AND WHY THIS IS RELEVANT TO EVERY LITIGATOR…)

June 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

We have had three series on advocacy on this site.  They have all been from the viewpoint of judges. Looking at guidance given by judges throughout the world. The point being that judges are not your clients, but they are…

THE COURT CAN ORDER SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE AGAINST A RELUCTANT LANDLORD: IF THE DEFENDANT WANTED TO ARGUE THAT THIS WAS NOT FEASIBLE THEN IT SHOULD HAVE ADDUCED EVIDENCE AT THE TRIAL

THE COURT CAN ORDER SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE AGAINST A RELUCTANT LANDLORD: IF THE DEFENDANT WANTED TO ARGUE THAT THIS WAS NOT FEASIBLE THEN IT SHOULD HAVE ADDUCED EVIDENCE AT THE TRIAL

June 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Enforcement, Members Content

There is little (if any) point litigating if a claimant is not going to obtain an effective remedy if successful. Here we have a case where the claimant sought (and obtained) an order for specific performance. There are lessons here…

UPDATED GUIDANCE ON COMPLETING CASE ADMINISTRATION TASKS IN MyHMCTS

UPDATED GUIDANCE ON COMPLETING CASE ADMINISTRATION TASKS IN MyHMCTS

June 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

On the 29th May HMCTS published updated guidance on how to complete case administration tasks in MyHMCTS.  The changes the updates made are not wholly clear, here are what appears to be the main changes.   What HMCTS says changed…

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THE CLAIMANTS HAD ISSUED IN  THE WRONG COURT, USING THE WRONG METHOD? THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THE CLAIMANTS HAD ISSUED IN THE WRONG COURT, USING THE WRONG METHOD? THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

June 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

This is a judgment that bristles with procedural issues. The claimants had issued in the wrong court, using the wrong procedure. The defendant made applications which (initially) were in the wrong form. The judge had to consider whether the actions…

EXPERT WATCH 50: THE EXPERT SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HIS TRUE OPINIONS EARLIER - NOT WAITED UNTIL CROSS-EXAMINATION

EXPERT WATCH 50: THE EXPERT SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HIS TRUE OPINIONS EARLIER – NOT WAITED UNTIL CROSS-EXAMINATION

June 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

Experts faced with evidence that appears to contradict their earlier views often face a dilemma. In particular they need to consider whether their earlier conclusions remain valid.  We have an example here where the judge was critical of the expert’s…

EXPERT WATCH 49: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS "UNUSUAL" AT AN INTERLOCUTORY HEARING: "THIS MIXTURE OF OF SUBMISSIONS AND OPINION WAS NOT CPR 35 COMPLIANT EXPERT EVIDENCE"

EXPERT WATCH 49: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “UNUSUAL” AT AN INTERLOCUTORY HEARING: “THIS MIXTURE OF OF SUBMISSIONS AND OPINION WAS NOT CPR 35 COMPLIANT EXPERT EVIDENCE”

June 8, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Here we look at part of a judgment that dealt with expert evidence. The Master was clear that a party could not rely on expert evidence without permission. The use of such evidence is “unusual” in an interlocutory application. Further…

IF YOU ARE ASKING FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL - MAKE SURE YOU ARE AVAILABLE...: JUDGE SAYS THE PARTIES SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THIS ISSUE

IF YOU ARE ASKING FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL – MAKE SURE YOU ARE AVAILABLE…: JUDGE SAYS THE PARTIES SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THIS ISSUE

June 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we are looking at a short, but important, point in relation to seeking an expedited trial.  The parties agreed the need for a speedy trial and agreed the dates.  However it turns out that neither of the leading counsel…

CAN YOU CONVERT PART 7 PROCEEDINGS TO PART 8 PROCEEDINGS: THIS REMAINS AN OPEN QUESTION

CAN YOU CONVERT PART 7 PROCEEDINGS TO PART 8 PROCEEDINGS: THIS REMAINS AN OPEN QUESTION

June 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is clear power in the rules to allow the court to transfer actions issued using Part 8 to Part 7.  However there is no express rule allowing transfer the other way.  The issue was considered in this case.  There…

COST BITES 396 : THE CLAIMANT'S CONDUCT WAS SUCH IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS IN THE NATIONAL LOTTERY CASE; IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO REDUCE THE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANTS' COSTS

COST BITES 396 : THE CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT WAS SUCH IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS IN THE NATIONAL LOTTERY CASE; IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO REDUCE THE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANTS’ COSTS

June 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We have seen many cases in which the courts have considered whether indemnity costs should be ordered. Here we have a case where the judge was clear in her view that the claimant’s conduct of the litigation was such that…

COST BITES 395: A RETAINER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE TERMS IN RELATION TO HOURLY RATES RENDERED IT TOO UNCERTAIN (COURT OF APPEAL DECISION YESTERDAY)

COST BITES 395: A RETAINER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE TERMS IN RELATION TO HOURLY RATES RENDERED IT TOO UNCERTAIN (COURT OF APPEAL DECISION YESTERDAY)

June 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This appeal has been much discussed in the specialist press. A solicitor’s client argued that the terms of a retainer rendered in a Contentious Business Agreement. This would have given her greater scope to dispute the bills.  The Court of…

THE TIMES (OR THE COURTS) THEY ARE A CHANGING: MODERNISING THE HIGH COURT THROUGH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BUSINESS & PROPERTY DIVISION

THE TIMES (OR THE COURTS) THEY ARE A CHANGING: MODERNISING THE HIGH COURT THROUGH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE BUSINESS & PROPERTY DIVISION

June 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes

Early next year there will be a new division of the High Court – the Business and Property Division. This was announced yesterday, with all Business and Property Courts to become part of the new Business and Property Division.  We…

COST BITES 394: COURT OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT LANDLORD IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE COSTS: AWARD OF INTEREST ALSO OVERTURNED

COST BITES 394: COURT OVERTURNS DECISION THAT A CLAIMANT LANDLORD IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE COSTS: AWARD OF INTEREST ALSO OVERTURNED

June 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Interest, Members Content

This is a case where a decision as to costs and interests was overturned on appeal.  The Circuit Judge found that the claimant landlord had no entitlement to claim costs under the terms of the lease.  Further the claim for…

DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW

DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Webinar

Checklists are always a feature of discussions I have with publishers and legal professionals.  I have prepared have created a whole series of checklists for lawyers (9 in total)  and a series for experts (6),  plus a “Judicial Red Flags”…

SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE:  SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY...

SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE: SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY…

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

This case, where judgment was given today,  is essential reading for anyone litigating using  CE-File. It is also essential to anyone involved in group litigation.  This is  a case where 5,000 claimants were refused relief from sanctions. That initial difficulty…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: SOME DELAYS WERE UNEXPLAINED AND THERE WERE OTHER BREACHES OF THE RULES: SOME LESSONS ON COMPLIANCE HERE...

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: SOME DELAYS WERE UNEXPLAINED AND THERE WERE OTHER BREACHES OF THE RULES: SOME LESSONS ON COMPLIANCE HERE…

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

We are looking at an (unsuccessful) application for relief from sanctions in a family case.  A husband sought permission to appeal some 10 1/2 months out of time.  What is particularly interesting here are the judge accepted that some delay…

AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A "MINOR ERROR..."

AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A “MINOR ERROR…”

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at how a simple mistake in the naming of a file led to a potentially disastrous problem when it led to an appeal being out of time. The wrong documents were sent to the court when an…

AN APPEAL OVER A TIME ESTIMATE FOR TRIAL: THIS SHOULD NOT LAST 15 DAYS, NOR WILL IT BE DONE IN 5:  EIGHT DAYS REMAINS THE CORRECT CONCLUSION

AN APPEAL OVER A TIME ESTIMATE FOR TRIAL: THIS SHOULD NOT LAST 15 DAYS, NOR WILL IT BE DONE IN 5: EIGHT DAYS REMAINS THE CORRECT CONCLUSION

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This blog has covered issues relating to time estimates many times. I cannot recall, however, a case where there has been an appeal over a judicial determination of a time estimate for a trial. We have such a case here. …

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: A LITIGANT CANNOT APPLY TO SET ASIDE A DECISION MADE WITHOUT A HEARING WHEN THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR THIS AND HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SUBMISSIONS

June 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at a recent decision that has major practical implications for  anyone making an application, or anyone disgruntled with a court decision.  The applicant asked, specifically, for an application to be considered on paper.  The matter was considered…

COST BITES 392 : BOTH PARTIES MADE "PART 36 OFFERS": BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID...)

COST BITES 392 : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

May 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we have a case where both parties made Part 36 offers.  The court held that the offers were ineffective. One because the offeror had not beaten their offer on a true “like-for-like” comparison. The other offer was held not…

PRACTICE DIRECTION CHANGES INTRODUCED YESTERDAY: NEW PROVISIONS IN THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL: "OTHER REMEDY" CLAIMS CAN NOW BE MADE

PRACTICE DIRECTION CHANGES INTRODUCED YESTERDAY: NEW PROVISIONS IN THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL: “OTHER REMEDY” CLAIMS CAN NOW BE MADE

May 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes

Some new provisions relating to the Damages Claim Portal came into effect yesterday, introduced in Practice Direction 51ZB (the Damages Claims Pilot) . Essentially these allow “other remedy claims” to be issued alongside damages claims. It also extends the portal…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 14: CLAIMANT FAILS IN SLIPPING CASE: THERE WAS A "HYPOTHETICAL" RISK OF SLIPPING WHICH THE DEFENDANT DID NOT NEED TO DEAL WITH

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 14: CLAIMANT FAILS IN SLIPPING CASE: THERE WAS A “HYPOTHETICAL” RISK OF SLIPPING WHICH THE DEFENDANT DID NOT NEED TO DEAL WITH

May 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are continuing our review of personal injury cases with another slipping case where the claim failed (don’t worry the imbalance will be addressed in due course). However the reason in this case was simply because the matter that caused…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 13: WHERE THERE IS BLAME THERE IS NOT ALWAYS A CLAIM: THE DEFENDANT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BUT THE CLAIMANT'S ACTION FAILED

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 13: WHERE THERE IS BLAME THERE IS NOT ALWAYS A CLAIM: THE DEFENDANT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BUT THE CLAIMANT’S ACTION FAILED

May 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

Today we will, primarily, be looking at personal injury and clinical negligence issues.  Here we look at a case where the claim failed even though the judge found there was a breach of duty.  The difficulty for the claimant was…

SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS

SERVICE POINTS 44: LOCAL AUTHORITY FAILS TO SERVE PROPERLY ON INTERESTED PARTIES TO PROPOSED APPEAL: THE WHOLE APPEAL FAILS

May 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Here we have another case of a failure to serve a claim form properly.  This time a local authority failed to serve interested parties to an appeal because, rather than sending the claim forms to them personally, they were sent…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: TIPS FOR TESTIFYING IN COURT: FROM THE UNITED STATE'S ATTORNEY'S OFFICE (MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA)

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: TIPS FOR TESTIFYING IN COURT: FROM THE UNITED STATE’S ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA)

May 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Earlier posts have written on the issue of how little guidance there is for those attending courts (civil courts in particular) to give evidence.   An earlier post provided useful links. Here we look at the guidance given in one of…

SERVICE POINTS 43: WHY CPR 6.15 IS NOT THE "CAVALRY" COMING OVER THE HILL TO SAVE YOU IF THE CLAIM FORM HAS NOT BEEN SERVED PROPERLY

SERVICE POINTS 43: WHY CPR 6.15 IS NOT THE “CAVALRY” COMING OVER THE HILL TO SAVE YOU IF THE CLAIM FORM HAS NOT BEEN SERVED PROPERLY

May 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form

There must be many anxious litigators who have read the words of CPR 6.15 and happily assumed that their case is saved. On the face of it this rule gives the court a wide power to authorise service by another…

SERVICE POINTS 42: A £82 MILLION POUND FAILS BECAUSE THE CLAIM FORM WAS SENT BY EMAIL TO SOLICITORS WHO HAD NOT STATED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT SERVICE: AN OLD ISSUE (AND A BIG ONE)

SERVICE POINTS 42: A £82 MILLION POUND FAILS BECAUSE THE CLAIM FORM WAS SENT BY EMAIL TO SOLICITORS WHO HAD NOT STATED THAT THEY WOULD ACCEPT SERVICE: AN OLD ISSUE (AND A BIG ONE)

May 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Service of the claim form

This will not be the only case about (mis) service of the claim form this week, however it may be the largest.  We have the “traditional” pattern of a claimant leaving service until the very last day and then serving…

COST BITES 391: TOO  MUCH CORRESPONDENCE, GRADE C RATES NOT INCREASED AND "SO CALLED" SKELETON ARGUMENTS, WHICH REPEAT THE CONTENTS OF OVER-LENGTHY WITNESS STATEMENTS

COST BITES 391: TOO MUCH CORRESPONDENCE, GRADE C RATES NOT INCREASED AND “SO CALLED” SKELETON ARGUMENTS, WHICH REPEAT THE CONTENTS OF OVER-LENGTHY WITNESS STATEMENTS

May 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

There are some interesting observations in the short judgment on costs in this case.  There was too much correspondence, “witness statements” were in reality skeleton arguments, with the contents then repeated in skeleton arguments.  Furthermore a “good” Grade C is…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND PREPARING FOR TRIAL: WEBINAR ON 29th MAY 2026: IT MAY BE A WHOLE BUNDLE OF FUN

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND PREPARING FOR TRIAL: WEBINAR ON 29th MAY 2026: IT MAY BE A WHOLE BUNDLE OF FUN

May 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Webinar

In Serra -v- Harvey [2024], wasted costs were ordered on an indemnity basis against the claimant’s solicitors because the lateness and condition of the trial bundles. The bundles were described as “haphazard”.  This is just one of numerous posts on…

COST BITES 391: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION THAT SOLICITOR'S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED AT "NIL":  THERE IS NO "RESTITUTIONARY" RIGHT TO DAMAGES WHERE THE CFA ITSELF MADE EXPRESS PROVISIONS FOR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES

COST BITES 391: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION THAT SOLICITOR’S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED AT “NIL”: THERE IS NO “RESTITUTIONARY” RIGHT TO DAMAGES WHERE THE CFA ITSELF MADE EXPRESS PROVISIONS FOR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES

May 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

I wrote about this case in August 2025 “Here we have a case that could well bring tears to the eyes of any litigator who works on a conditional fee basis.  For the second time, on appeal, the claimant solicitor’s…

THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE  - LANDING SOLICITORS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE AGAIN (AND DON'T BLAME THE AI FOR EVERYTHING - IT ACTUALLY GAVE OUT WARNINGS TO CHECK...)

THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE – LANDING SOLICITORS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE AGAIN (AND DON’T BLAME THE AI FOR EVERYTHING – IT ACTUALLY GAVE OUT WARNINGS TO CHECK…)

May 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

One day the incorrect use of AI to cite “hallucinated” authorities is going to ruin someone’s career. It may have done so already, there are a number of SRA investigations pending.   The example we look at here is highly educational…

BACK TO BASICS (BANK HOLIDAY) MONDAY: A REMINDER OF WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: THE PROFOUND DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THE COURT APPROACHES A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION

BACK TO BASICS (BANK HOLIDAY) MONDAY: A REMINDER OF WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: THE PROFOUND DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THE COURT APPROACHES A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION

May 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

It is important to remember the major difference in the court’s approach to a an application for an extension that is made ahead of the date of compliance compared to one that is made afterwards.  The governing principles are very different….

THE COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED DEFENDANT TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED "LATE": THE CRUCIAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN "IN TIME" AND "OUT OF TIME" APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME

THE COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED DEFENDANT TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED “LATE”: THE CRUCIAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN “IN TIME” AND “OUT OF TIME” APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME

May 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

I am grateful to Barrister Simon Brindle for sending me a copy of the judgment of this Court of Appeal judgment given yesterday.  It relates primarily to the major distinction between an application made “ahead” of time and one made…

COST BITES 389: THE SRA IS LIABLE TO PAY THE COSTS OF AN APPEAL WHERE IT WAS THE ORIGINAL APPELLANT ITS POSITION IS "MORE AKIN TO THAT OF A NORMAL LITIGANT"

COST BITES 389: THE SRA IS LIABLE TO PAY THE COSTS OF AN APPEAL WHERE IT WAS THE ORIGINAL APPELLANT ITS POSITION IS “MORE AKIN TO THAT OF A NORMAL LITIGANT”

May 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Here we consider an issue that has some relevance to the profession as a whole.  Should the SRA be liable to pay the costs of an appeal from the SDT?  In this case the SRA was the instigator of the…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: "WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES WHEN ITS DEFENCE IS STRUCK OUT?" (MAY 2017)

THROWBACK FRIDAY: “WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES WHEN ITS DEFENCE IS STRUCK OUT?” (MAY 2017)

May 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Damages, Default judgment,, Members Content, Striking out

Recent cases have considered the question of what a defendant can argue as to damages when a claimant has obtained summary judgment. Here we look at a case that considers the position when the defendant’s defence has been struck out. …

WOULD BE APPELLANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH SEVEN DAY DEADLINE: ARGUMENTS ABOUT "PUBLIC INTEREST" FAILS TO TAKE OFF: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING TIME LIMITS...

WOULD BE APPELLANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH SEVEN DAY DEADLINE: ARGUMENTS ABOUT “PUBLIC INTEREST” FAILS TO TAKE OFF: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING TIME LIMITS…

May 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where the “would be” appellant failed to obtain permission to appeal out of time.  They failed to notice that the time limits for appealing this specific type of decision had been changed two months prior…

MAZUR MATTERS 62: THE REVISED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: SOME SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS

MAZUR MATTERS 62: THE REVISED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: SOME SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS

May 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a revised version of the Court of Appeal judgment in Mazur.  Some paragraphs were amended slightly (but significantly). These amendments do not appeal to have made their way to the version of the judgment that is publicly available….

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 76: APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND THE DAY BEFORE THE COURT OF APPEAL HEARING, WITH NO NOTICE GIVEN: HAVE A GUESS HOW THIS WENT...

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 76: APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND THE DAY BEFORE THE COURT OF APPEAL HEARING, WITH NO NOTICE GIVEN: HAVE A GUESS HOW THIS WENT…

May 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Statements of Case

There have been quite a few cases about pleading recently.  This case is interesting because it makes the point that after  a default judgment is entered a claimant is only entitled to have damages assessed on the basis of their…

1 2 … 27 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES 402: DOES THE FACT THAT LEGAL FEES HAVE BEEN PAID BY RELATIVES MEAN THAT A RESPONDENT IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY COSTS? THE INDEMNITY PRINCIPLE CONSIDERED
  • ASSESSORS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL IN ADMIRALTY CASES: WHY WERE THEY NECESSARY? APPELLANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED FROM THAT SINKING FEELING …
  • DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: THE SOLICITORS CONDUCT WAS A “MATTER OF VERY REAL CONCERN” – BUT THE APPLICATION WAS GRANTED
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 80: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM “FAILED TO FORMULATE A LEGALLY RECOGNISABLE CASE AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT”: THE ACTION WAS STRUCK OUT
  • THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.