Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Conduct » Page 10
THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 2:  CLAIMANTS FAILED TO BEAT PART 36 OFFER, NO GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM NORMAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES

THE JUDGMENT IN ALI -V- CHANNEL 5 2: CLAIMANTS FAILED TO BEAT PART 36 OFFER, NO GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM NORMAL COSTS CONSEQUENCES

April 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

This is the second post about the decision on costs in Ali & Anor v Channel 5 Broadcast Ltd [2018] EWHC 840 (Ch). Here we look at the issue relating to Part 36.  The defendant had made a Part 36 offer….

MAKING UNWARRANTED ASSERTIONS LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS – AGAINST A SECRETARY OF STATE

April 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are numerous cases where the courts have considered conduct that leads to indemnity costs. In Secretary of State for the Home Department v Barry [2018] EWCA Civ 790 the Court of Appeal found that the Home Department’s conduct of an…

WHEN THE JUDGE IS ENTITLED NOT TO DECIDE ON THE EVIDENCE:  PLUS THE IMPORTANT ISSUE OF  CONDUCT AND COSTS

WHEN THE JUDGE IS ENTITLED NOT TO DECIDE ON THE EVIDENCE: PLUS THE IMPORTANT ISSUE OF CONDUCT AND COSTS

March 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision today in Constandas v Lysandrou & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 613 illustrates two distinct issues: The position when a judge is unable to make a finding on the evidence. What conduct can lead to a successful…

LITIGATORS - MISSED A DEADLINE? DON'T DIG BIGGER HOLES FOR YOURSELF: DIG YOURSELF OUT (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM YOUR FRIENDS)

LITIGATORS – MISSED A DEADLINE? DON’T DIG BIGGER HOLES FOR YOURSELF: DIG YOURSELF OUT (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM YOUR FRIENDS)

March 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Jackson, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The decision in Wingate & Anor v The Solicitors Regulation Authority [2018] EWCA Civ 366 may well be Jackson L.J’s last judgment (certainly as a full time judge). It concerned the conduct of solicitors. I want to look at one aspect…

THE COURT "REGRETTED IF NOT DEPLORED" EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE ON JURISDICTION ISSUES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

THE COURT “REGRETTED IF NOT DEPLORED” EXCESSIVE EXPENDITURE ON JURISDICTION ISSUES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

February 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Case Management, Members Content, Proportionality

In Ogale Community & Ors v Royal Dutch Shell Plc & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 191 the Court of Appeal made observations about the need to keep applications about jurisdiction in proportion.  “… hearings concerning the issue of appropriate forum should…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY A DOZEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT: A RECAP

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY A DOZEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT: A RECAP

January 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, QOCS

Given recent decisions on fundamental dishonesty this may be a good time to rake over some key points. “I assure the Committee that the way that the clause is drafted should not result in the courts using the measures lightly….

FACT FINDING IN THE FAMILY COURT:  ERRATIC WITNESSES AND BEHAVIOUR ON DISCLOSURE WHERE THE CONDUCT WAS NOT FAR SHORT OF CONTEMPT

FACT FINDING IN THE FAMILY COURT: ERRATIC WITNESSES AND BEHAVIOUR ON DISCLOSURE WHERE THE CONDUCT WAS NOT FAR SHORT OF CONTEMPT

January 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Conduct, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

We have looked at “fact finding” by the courts many times.  The fact finder in a family case has a particularly  arduous and unenviable task . The judge has to  assess evidence that is often highly charged, and where there…

COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL  - IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD

COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL – IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD

December 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

The decision in Salekipour & Anor v Parmar [2017] EWCA Civ 2141 was made after three previous hearings a (including two appeal hearings) in the lower courts.  It was the only time the claimants were successful.  It involved an important procedural…

COURT OF APPEAL STATES INDEMNITY COSTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARDED: SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BULLISH IN BRADFORD...

COURT OF APPEAL STATES INDEMNITY COSTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARDED: SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BULLISH IN BRADFORD…

December 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is unusual for the Court of Appeal to interfere with a discretionary order in relation to costs. It is even more unusual for the court to replace an order for costs on the standard basis with indemnity costs. This…

COSTS DISALLOWED IN FULL DUE TO MISCONDUCT IN ASSESSMENT PROCESS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

December 15, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In GSD Law Ltd v Wardman & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 2144 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision whereby the claimants’ costs were disallowed because of misconduct during the assessment process.   “The alleged misconduct in this case goes to…

WRITING TO THE COURT ON A UNILATERAL BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS DON'T DO IT

WRITING TO THE COURT ON A UNILATERAL BASIS: COURT OF APPEAL SAYS DON’T DO IT

December 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Members Content

Several passages in the judgment in Zuma’s Choice Pet Products Ltd & Anor v Azumi Ltd & Ors [2017] EWCA Civ 2133 emphasise a point made earlier this year. A litigant should not write to the court on a unilateral basis….

ADVOCACY - THE JUDGE'S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 4: THREATENING YOUR OPPONENT WITH A "PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION" AND MAKING FACES AT THE JUDGE MAY WELL BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE

ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW, SERIES 2 PART 4: THREATENING YOUR OPPONENT WITH A “PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION” AND MAKING FACES AT THE JUDGE MAY WELL BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE

November 16, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content

This series is about learning from judges. Here I advocate (hopefully in a civil way) learning from one judgment.  That is the judgment of District Judge Chin in the  extraordinary case of Revson -v- Cinque & Cinque in 1999 (PC….

"BREATHTAKINGLY RUDE" LETTERS INDICATED AN INTENT TO ABUSE THE PROCESS: DEFENDANT'S  CONDUCT IN FAILING TO PAY FOR PITCH CROSSED THE LINE

“BREATHTAKINGLY RUDE” LETTERS INDICATED AN INTENT TO ABUSE THE PROCESS: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT IN FAILING TO PAY FOR PITCH CROSSED THE LINE

October 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content

In Bernard Sport Surfaces Ltd v Astrosoccer4u Ltd [2017] EWHC 2425 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson had strong words to say about correspondence and conduct which, he held, were simply attempts to avoid a debt that was lawfully due. “… all of…

CONDUCT AND LITIGATION: THE SEPARATION OF POWERS AND THE RULE OF LAW: A SECRETARY OF STATE DOES “NOT REQUIRE KINDERGARTEN-TYPE ELABORATION”

October 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Conduct, Members Content

The headnote in R (on the application of AM and others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (liberty to apply – scope – discharging mandatory orders) [2017] UKUT 372 (IAC) appears relatively benign, Mr Justice McCloskey deciding that the upper…

THE BANK OF IRELAND CASE ROUND TWO: APPROPRIATE SUMS FOR AN INTERIM PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED BECAUSE OF CONDUCT OF EXPERT

October 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Experts, Members Content

In an earlier post we looked at the judgment in Bank of Ireland -v- Watts Group PLC   [2017]EWHC 1667 (TCC) where Mr Justice Coulson was particularly excoriating about the claimant’s expert. Having lost the case the bank had to pay the…

BEHAVIOUR IN THE COURTROOM - IT GOES FURTHER THAN YOU THINK:  SOME CASES AND SOME GUIDANCE

BEHAVIOUR IN THE COURTROOM – IT GOES FURTHER THAN YOU THINK: SOME CASES AND SOME GUIDANCE

October 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Members Content

The vast majority of studies on behaviour in the courtroom concentrate on the interaction between the judge, the advocates and the witnesses.  However the courtroom is a big place. Twice in recent weeks we have seen judges refer to the…

SENSIBLE CONCESSIONS PLAY NO PART IN THE ORDERING OF INDEMNITY COSTS: ORDER MADE ON MERIT

SENSIBLE CONCESSIONS PLAY NO PART IN THE ORDERING OF INDEMNITY COSTS: ORDER MADE ON MERIT

September 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I have written about the substantive judgment in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit Merrell Technology Limited [2017] EWHC 1763 (TCC) several times already.  There is a shorter judgment on costs at  Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2017] EWHC…

FACT FINDING FOR LAWYERS : HOLIDAY CLAIMS: SRA GUIDANCE - NOT A WALK ON THE BEACH

FACT FINDING FOR LAWYERS : HOLIDAY CLAIMS: SRA GUIDANCE – NOT A WALK ON THE BEACH

September 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The Solicitors Regulation Authority has issued a specific warning notice in relation to holiday sickness claims.  The notice, issued on the 6th September 2017, contains important guidance in relation to the role of the solicitor in investigating facts. The guidance…

"ROBUST" BUT NOT GRATUITOUSLY OFFENSIVE:" SRA GUIDANCE ON COMMUNICATIONS WITH OTHER FIRMS AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: THE FUTILITY OF RUDENESS

“ROBUST” BUT NOT GRATUITOUSLY OFFENSIVE:” SRA GUIDANCE ON COMMUNICATIONS WITH OTHER FIRMS AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON: THE FUTILITY OF RUDENESS

August 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Members Content

The Solicitors Regulatory Authority has issued guidance today on “Offensive communications”   It gives me a chance to recap on earlier posts about the futility of rudeness. “Your role is to act in the client’s best interests; antagonising the other side…

COPYING THE OTHER SIDE INTO CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE COURT: A RECAP AND REVIEW OF THE EARLIER CASE MENTIONED

COPYING THE OTHER SIDE INTO CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE COURT: A RECAP AND REVIEW OF THE EARLIER CASE MENTIONED

August 15, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

I am writing, again, about the the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr in Topping v Ralph Tristees Ltd [2017] EWHC 1954 (QB). The point the case makes about the correct route of appeal has been commented on, however I had not anticipated…

COSTS AFTER A PART 36 OFFER AFFECTED BY THE CHANGE IN THE DISCOUNT RATE: CONDUCT OF DEFENCE ALONE SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY INDEMNITY COSTS

COSTS AFTER A PART 36 OFFER AFFECTED BY THE CHANGE IN THE DISCOUNT RATE: CONDUCT OF DEFENCE ALONE SUFFICIENT TO JUSTIFY INDEMNITY COSTS

August 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

I have written several times about the judgment of Thirlwall LJ in Marsh -v- MOJ*. I have been provided with a copy of a note of the judgment on costs given on the 31st July 2017. I am grateful to…

YOU OFFERED ME £100,000: I'VE ACCEPTED £15,000- OH AND I WANT MY COSTS: THE DANGERS OF NOT NEGOTIATING AND WHY THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS

YOU OFFERED ME £100,000: I’VE ACCEPTED £15,000- OH AND I WANT MY COSTS: THE DANGERS OF NOT NEGOTIATING AND WHY THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS

July 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

I tried to summarise the judgment of Mr Justice Mann in Jordan -v- MGN Limited [2017] EWHC 1937 (Ch) and I found it  difficult. Every word of the judgment is important.  It shows, at least, a very insouciant, approach by the…

STOP USING PROCEDURE TO BULLY  VULNERABLE PEOPLE:  HM REVENUE & CUSTOMS TOLD TO READ DENTON PROPERLY

STOP USING PROCEDURE TO BULLY VULNERABLE PEOPLE: HM REVENUE & CUSTOMS TOLD TO READ DENTON PROPERLY

June 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

I have no intention of taking this blog into areas of taxation and customs and excise. However the judgment of the First-tier Tribunal (Tax) in E -v- The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs [2017] UKFTT 348 (TCC) contains…

DUTY TO DRAW ADVERSE AUTHORITIES TO THE  ATTENTION OF THE COURT: HOW FAR DOES IT GO?

DUTY TO DRAW ADVERSE AUTHORITIES TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT: HOW FAR DOES IT GO?

May 5, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Members Content

The duty to draw the court’s attention to authorities that do not support your case is an important one.  In Weir -v- Hildson [2017] EWHC 983 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee discusses the extent of this duty. THE CASE The applicant…

BILL OF £101,677.21  AND THE CLAIMANT ENDS UP WITH £2,515.60: MISCONDUCT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS HAS SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES

BILL OF £101,677.21 AND THE CLAIMANT ENDS UP WITH £2,515.60: MISCONDUCT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS HAS SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES

April 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

I am grateful to Justin Edwards of BLM solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of Master Whalan in Jago -v-Whitbread a decision of Master Whalan. A copy of that case is attached here ( 2016.10.05 – Approved Judgment)….

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WRITE: THE SUPREME COURT MAY READ IT ONE DAY (AND IT MAY END UP ON A BLOG SOMEWHERE...)

BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WRITE: THE SUPREME COURT MAY READ IT ONE DAY (AND IT MAY END UP ON A BLOG SOMEWHERE…)

April 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Members Content

There has already been some interesting debate on Twitter about one aspect of the Supreme Court decision in Times -v- Flood [2017] UKSC 33 that has not made the headlines.   Dominic Regan observed that the case is another example…

"SOLICITOR FORCING ME TO SIGN AN INCORRECT WITNESS STATEMENT":  A VERY FRIGHTENING SEARCH TERM

“SOLICITOR FORCING ME TO SIGN AN INCORRECT WITNESS STATEMENT”: A VERY FRIGHTENING SEARCH TERM

March 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

It is possible to see some of the search terms that lead people to this blog (I should stress that there are no details of who made the search). One of the search terms yesterday was “solicitor forcing me to…

NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER WHEN UNSUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT HAD TURNED DOWN A PART 36 OFFER OF £500,000

NO ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER WHEN UNSUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT HAD TURNED DOWN A PART 36 OFFER OF £500,000

March 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In Lyons -v- Fox Williams LLP  [2017] EWHC 532 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered issues relating to costs after a claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim for professional negligence. THE CASE The claimant had been unsuccessful in a claim…

COSTS NORMALLY FOLLOW THE EVENT: SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT ENTITLED TO 100% OF ITS COSTS

COSTS NORMALLY FOLLOW THE EVENT: SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT ENTITLED TO 100% OF ITS COSTS

March 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We looked at the decision in Oldcorn -v- Southern Water Services Ltd [2017] EWHC in an earlier post.   A second judgment on the case on the issue of costs  is reported at [2017] EWHC 460 (TCC).  .  The successful defendant was…

COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED

COSTS, CONDUCT, PART 36, COSTS BUDGETING: THE SECOND JUDGMENT IN GIANT CAR LIMITED

March 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Part 36

The previous post looked at the judgment of Mr Stephen Furst QC in Car Giant Limited -v- the Mayor and Burgesses of the London Borough of Hammersmith [2017] EWHC 197 (TCC). Here we look at the subsequent judgment on costs at [2017]…

PROVING THINGS 53: BECAUSE A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST SOME OF THE TIME IT DOESN’T MEAN THEY WERE DISHONEST ALL OF THE TIME

February 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Pemberton Greenish LLP -v- Henry [2017] EWHC 246 (QB) provides an interesting assessment of witness evidence and demonstrates the difficulty in proving dishonesty. Mr Justice Jeremy Baker held that the fact that a solicitor was negligent, breached…

BABIES, BUNDLES, HUMAN RIGHTS, PROPORTIONALITY, CONDUCT AND COSTS:ALL IN ONE JUDGMENT

February 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Proportionality

The judgment of Mr Justice Cobb in AZ -v- Kirklees Council [2017] EWFC 11 contains much of interest to the legal profession generally.  It shows the danger of failing to comply with court directions; make or respond to appropriate offers…

APPLICATION FOR INDEMNITY COSTS REFUSED: THE JUDGE LOOKS AT THE COSTS BUDGET OF THE LOSING PARTY

February 4, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We have looked many times at cases where judges have considered granting indemnity costs.  This issue was considered by Mr Justice Coulson in MacInnes -v- Gross [2017]EWHC 127 (QB). One interesting aspect is that the judge looked at the losing…

DISMAL CORRESPONDENCE, COSTS AND CONDUCT: THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT GIVES A WARNING

January 31, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is a rare to have a specific judgment from the Administrative Court on the question of costs.  In Taylor -v- Honiton Town Council [2017] EWHC 101 (Admin) Mr Justice Edis  considered issues relating to costs. “I consider that, generally,…

ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: ITS NOT MONEY IN THE BANK

January 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Members Content, Part 36

The judgment of Sir Anthony Edwards-Stuart in Lloyds Bank -v- McBains Cooper  [2017] EWHC 30 (TCC) considers the question of issue based costs orders. What is interesting here is: Neither party appears to have made a valid Part 36 offer….

COUNSEL’S DUTY IS TO THE CLIENT: GUIDANCE FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL

January 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Case Management, Conduct, Members Content, Sanctions

 There have been strong words issued by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum) Chamber recently in relation to non-compliance and the imposition of sanctions.  The Tribunal has more problems in imposing sanctions than most because of the overwhelming need for…

COSTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND THE EXPENSIVE CONSEQUENCES OF A SIEGE BASED MENTALITY

January 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

It is surprising how often cases that have been looked at because of issues in relation to the evidence at trial are reported again on the issue of costs.  The Ocensa Pipeline Group Litigation case is such an action.  I…

ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE'S VIEW X: 10 KEY POINTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD

ADVOCACY: THE JUDGE’S VIEW X: 10 KEY POINTS FROM AROUND THE WORLD

December 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

This is the last in the series of Advocacy the Judge’s view.  We have looked at advice given by judges from around the world.  Here I select a key point from each. 1. ADVICE FROM CANADA – MANNERS MATTER It…

PROPORTIONATE COST ORDERS WHEN COSTS ARE £8 MILLION AND £10 MILLION APIECE: HIGH COURT DECISION

November 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

We have already looked at the decision in Amey LG Limited -v- Cumbria County Council [2016] EWHC 2496 (TCC) in relation to the question of proportionality. However the judgment contains much more of interest in relation to costs. It provides an…

THE DANGER OF NOT REPLYING TO CORRESPONDENCE: COSTS AWARDED AGAINST DEFENDANTS (& THE NEED FOR CO-OPERATION WHEN INSTRUCTING EXPERTS)

November 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgement of Chief Master Marsh in UPL Europe Limited -v- Agchemaccess Chemicals Limted [2016] EWHC 2898 (Ch) provides an object lesson in the dangers of failing to reply to correspondence. The judgment also contains important observations about need for…

PART 36 OFFERS AND COSTS: COSTS NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN CONSIDERING WHETHER AN OFFER HAS BEEN "BEATEN"

October 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Transocean Drilling UK Ltd -v- Providence Resources PLC [2016] EWHC 2611 (Comm) Mr Justice Popplewell considered the impact of a Part 36 offer in unusual circumstances.  These circumstances led the court to consider whether the impact of costs should…

BEING A LITIGATOR – WHEN IT ALL GETS TOO MUCH (AND IT IS YOU THAT HAS TO PICK UP THE PIECES)

October 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been a number of reported cases recently of young lawyers (sometimes trainees) obviously becoming overwhelmed by their workload.  This is not a new phenomenon, nor is it necessarily confined to young members of the profession. However it is…

NON-SOLICITOR LITIGATION ENTITIES AND WASTED COSTS: WANT TO BE £102,000 OUT OF POCKET?

August 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Wasted Costs, Witness statements

An earlier post looked at the issues relating to litigation being conducted by an non-authorised entity.  In M A Lloyd & Son Ltd -v- PPC International Limited [2016] EWHC 2162 (QB) issues of wasted costs arose in relation to a…

ATTRITIONAL WARFARE; UNMERITORIOUS POINTS AND UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH: SO MUCH (AND MORE) IN ONE JUDGMENT

August 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Damages, Default judgment,, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Edis in  Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust makes for uncomfortable reading on the issue of the general attitude of the lawyers towards the conduct of the litigation.   In addition to…

I WROTE LOTS OF UNEDIFYING, AGGRESSIVE AND UNCOOPERATIVE LETTERS: LOOK WHERE IT GOT ME

May 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

One of aspects of the judgment in  McTear -v- Englehard [2016] EWCA Civ 487 that could easily be overlooked is the observations of Lord Justice Vos in relation to the nature of the  correspondence between the parties. “It would seem…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE LAWYER'S DUTY NOT TO MISLEAD

April 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are some important observations  by Mr Justice Leggatt in Al-Saadoon & Others -v- the Secretary of State for Defence [2016] EWHC 773 (Admin).  The case relates to witness statements and the duty of the lawyer when they know that…

IT'S ALL ABOUT THE COSTS (AND A LOT OF TROUBLE): COURT OF APPEAL CASE CONSIDERED

March 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal judgment today  in Patience -v- Tanner [2016] EWCA Civ 158 is a classic example of the difficulties that arise when a case is, in essence, all about the costs. It shows the danger of making, and…

WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE PORTAL? INSURERS CONTACTING CLAIMANTS DIRECTLY: STILL

March 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

I post (with his permission) a letter from Kerry Kirkbride.  It relates to the regular issue of insurers ignoring claimant solicitors and writing to claimants directly after notification on the Portal. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE PORTAL? “I am…

"NEAR MISS" RULE NO LONGER APPLICABLE: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS DECISION ON COSTS

February 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Sugar Hut Group Limited -v- AJ Insurance Services [2016] EWCA Civ 46 the Court of Appeal overturned an award of costs made against a successful party. “The Claimants’ recovery exceeded the Part 36 offer by a comfortable margin and…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS: COMPLIANCE WITH ORDERS, ABSENT STATEMENTS AND LATE BUNDLES

November 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In F-v-M [2015] EWHC 3259 (Fam) Mr Justice Cobb made a wasted costs order against a firm of solicitors. The judgment is (and was designed to be) an object lesson in the need to comply with court directions and court…

← Previous 1 … 9 10 11 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

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU “OWN” IT…
  • 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
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS IN CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 19th MAY 2026: USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRES AND CHECKLISTS INCLUDED
  • 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
  • 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)

Top Posts

  • THE DEFENDANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER FROM THE CLAIMANT DID NOT PREVENT A SECOND ACTION IN RELATION TO A DIFFERENT (BUT RELATED) ISSUE
  • 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
  • SERVICE POINTS 40: SERVICE BY EMAIL WAS NOT VALID NEITHER WAS SERVICE AT THE "LAST KNOWN ADDRESS": THE CLAIMANT HAD TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE AS TO HIS STATE OF KNOWLEDGE
  • SERVICE POINTS 41: THE DEFENDANTS REQUIRED AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO DISPUTE JURISDICTION FOLLOWING INVALID SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: A POINT FOR PRACTITIONERS TO WATCH...
  • 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)

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.