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 2
A FURTHER EXAMPLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE GENERATING PHANTOM REFERENCES AND FALSE QUOTATIONS

A FURTHER EXAMPLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE GENERATING PHANTOM REFERENCES AND FALSE QUOTATIONS

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We see the another example of the dangers of the use of Artificial Intelligence in this case.  Two authorities relied upon by a respondent did not contain the words attributed to them, none of them supported the propositions that had…

MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR'S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS "NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION"

MAZUR MATTERS 48: THE INTERIM REPORT: REGULATOR’S GUIDANCE ON THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION WAS “NOT ALWAYS ARTICULATED WITH SUFFICIENT PRECISION”

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The snappily titled “Interim Report: Regulatory review of advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies”  from the Legal Services Board is five pages long (including one page spent on…

COST BITES 340:  CLAIMANTS' CONDUCT,  FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND EFFECTIVE REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS

COST BITES 340: CLAIMANTS’ CONDUCT, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND EFFECTIVE REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS

January 29, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

Here we have a case where the claimants were (largely) successful but the court made no order for costs between the parties. There were three major factors (i) the way in which the claimants conducted the action; (ii) the failure…

COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT'S HAD AN "ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION"

COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT’S HAD AN “ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION”

January 28, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We have looked many times at cases where the courts have considered whether or not costs should be awarded on an indemnity basis.  I do not recall a judgment where the judge has decided this issue so emphatically.   There were…

BEWARE OF FALSE (OR AT LEAST MISLEADING) DOCUMENTS WITH "COURT SEALS": "CLUMSY ATTEMPTS WHICH COULD MISLEAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC..."

BEWARE OF FALSE (OR AT LEAST MISLEADING) DOCUMENTS WITH “COURT SEALS”: “CLUMSY ATTEMPTS WHICH COULD MISLEAD MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC…”

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We have seen a few occasions where someone has produced an “official” court document which turned out to be no such thing.  We see another example here, a “warrant” that, on the face of  it had a red circular seal…

SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A "FORMIDABLE BURDEN"

SHOULD A LOSING PARTY FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT A PART 36 OFFER? A REMINDER THAT THIS IS A HIGH HURDLE WITH A “FORMIDABLE BURDEN”

January 26, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Witness statements

A litigant who fails to beat a Part 36 offer can normally expect to face the consequences set out in the rules.  There is an exception if that litigant can satisfy the court that it is “unjust” for those consequences…

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER...)

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: DO NOT MENTION A PART 36 OFFER TO THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE TRIAL(OR DURING IT FOR THAT MATTER…)

January 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The first time I wrote on this topic many practitioners expressed surprise that I had written something so very “basic”.  Some readers were incredulous. However, as we see below, others shared their experiences.  This rule is not known, or not…

COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED "AGGRESSIVELY" - COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED

COST BITES 327: THE COSTS OF FILING AN ERRANT REPLY CONSIDERED: AN APPLICATION PURSUED “AGGRESSIVELY” – COSTS REDUCED TO 10% OF THOSE CLAIMED

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we have the defendant making a justified, and successful, application to strike out a Reply. However the judge was unhappy with the manner in which the application (and the litigation generally) was being conduced (by both sides). He found…

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: "THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH"

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: “THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH”

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we see another litigant coming to grief because of a failure to file a costs budget on time.  The litigant had been warned of the consequences and the judge found that there was no good reason for the breach. …

MAZUR MATTERS 46: A "CLAIMANT'S REPRESENTATIVE" HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE IN THIS SMALL CLAIMS TRIAL:  "IT IS TO DISTORT THE PURPOSE OF SCH 3, PARA 7 BEYOND RECOGNITION THAT THE TRADITIONAL ROLE OF AN INHOUSE MANAGING CLERK UNDERTAKING THE ROUTINE WORK OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE BE EXTENDED INTO A WHOLESALE UNQUALIFIED ADVOCACY SCHEME"

MAZUR MATTERS 46: A “CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE” HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE IN THIS SMALL CLAIMS TRIAL: “IT IS TO DISTORT THE PURPOSE OF SCH 3, PARA 7 BEYOND RECOGNITION THAT THE TRADITIONAL ROLE OF AN INHOUSE MANAGING CLERK UNDERTAKING THE ROUTINE WORK OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE BE EXTENDED INTO A WHOLESALE UNQUALIFIED ADVOCACY SCHEME”

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

This is the first time I have seen Mazur mentioned and considered  in an issue as to rights of audience. In this case the judge held that the representative sent by the claimant to attend a small claims trial did…

COST BITES 324: COURT REFUSES TO REDUCE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S COSTS BECAUSE OF REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION

COST BITES 324: COURT REFUSES TO REDUCE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

A party liable to pay the costs of a successful opponent is always keen to reduce that liability, not least by arguing that they should have a reduction in costs because of their opponent’s conduct. We see such an argument…

WHEN A DAY LONG APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND INCURS COSTS OF OVER £1.3 MILLION (AND STILL THE BUNDLES AREN’T QUITE RIGHT…)

January 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Case

There are some interesting observations here about the strategy a party should adopt when facing an application to amend.  Such an application is not a “mini trial”.  It is clear from this case that substantial costs can be incurred in…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 13: WHAT ARE PEOPLE READING?

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 13: WHAT ARE PEOPLE READING?

December 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Relief from sanctions

It is always interesting to look back and see what are the most popular posts each year.  Sometimes this contains surprises, sometimes it says something about the state (or at least the interests) of the legal profession.    Here are…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 12: MAZUR AND THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: 48 POSTS TO DATE…

December 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

I have saved this topic from being the 13th in the series. However it may be fitting if it was.  From the moment I read the the Mazur judgment for the first time it was clear that it was going…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 11: OPENING LINES OF JUDGMENTS 2025: "FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS MEN LIVED JUST LIKE ANIMALS":  ST PAUL'S CATHEDRAL, SHERLOCK HOLMES AND FINDING INGENIOUS WAYS NOT TO PAY TAX: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE...

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 11: OPENING LINES OF JUDGMENTS 2025: “FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS MEN LIVED JUST LIKE ANIMALS”: ST PAUL’S CATHEDRAL, SHERLOCK HOLMES AND FINDING INGENIOUS WAYS NOT TO PAY TAX: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE…

December 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Consideration of the opening lines of judgments has been a feature of this blog for some years now. It has  sometimes been a way of providing a little light relief towards the end of what is often a 12 month…

MAZUR MATTERS 45: COURT OF APPEAL TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON 24th FEBRUARY 2026

MAZUR MATTERS 45: COURT OF APPEAL TO HEAR THE APPEAL ON 24th FEBRUARY 2026

December 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Court of Appeal is to hear the appear in the Mazur decision on the 24th February.  Here we re-visit the arguments that the Law Society and the SRA put forward at first instance. It will be interesting to see…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 5 : 111 POSTS IN THE "COSTS BITES" SERIES (AND COUNTING): DON'T LOOK AWAY NOW...

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 5 : 111 POSTS IN THE “COSTS BITES” SERIES (AND COUNTING): DON’T LOOK AWAY NOW…

December 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

There is no doubt at all that the Costs Bites series is one of the most widely read on this blog.  The series started in July 2022 and the aim is to look at what is happening in relation to…

USING WHATSAPP AND OTHER MEANS OF COMMUNICATION WITH CLIENTS: THE RISKS CONSIDERED

December 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Useful links, Well being

The previous post looked in detail at the issues in a solicitor and own client assessment  caused by the solicitor’s use of WhatsApp.  That judgment gives rise to much wider issues in relation to how solicitors communicate with clients. In…

“HALLUCINATIONS” IS NOT A GOOD WORD FOR FALSE CASES GENERATED BY AI: THIS JEOPARDISES THE RULE OF LAW: LESSONS FROM THE COURTS OF OREGON

December 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The issue of the citation of false cases generated by Artificial Intelligence is, it is clear, an international one.  Here we have a decision from the Court of Appeals in the State of Oregon.  Among other things it challenges the…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 44: COUNTERCLAIM WAS "INADEQUATELY PLEADED AND ABUSIVE": DEFENDANT FAILED TO PROPERLY PARTICULARISE ITS CASE

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 44: COUNTERCLAIM WAS “INADEQUATELY PLEADED AND ABUSIVE”: DEFENDANT FAILED TO PROPERLY PARTICULARISE ITS CASE

December 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

This is a case where the judge agreed with a submission that the counterclaim was “inadequately pleaded and abusive”.  The judge held that there was no need to formally strike it out, it failed in any event.  There are lessons…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR (2) - THE WORST PART: "HALLUCINATED" CASES IN THE COURTS: HOW IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BEING HANDLED & WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD FOR AI AND LAWYERS?

REVIEW OF THE YEAR (2) – THE WORST PART: “HALLUCINATED” CASES IN THE COURTS: HOW IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BEING HANDLED & WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD FOR AI AND LAWYERS?

December 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

If I had to pick the most frightening development of the year it is the revelation that parts of the legal profession have been relying on “hallucinated” (that is false) cases they have “found” by using Artificial Intelligence.   Here we…

A BREACH OF "PURDAH" OBLIGATIONS WHEN A WITNESS IS GIVING EVIDENCE: MISGUIDED BUT NOT DISHONEST

A BREACH OF “PURDAH” OBLIGATIONS WHEN A WITNESS IS GIVING EVIDENCE: MISGUIDED BUT NOT DISHONEST

December 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

This is a brief reminder of the importance of the obligations of a witness not to communicate with others (including their own legal team) whilst in the course of giving evidence. “This was obviously ill-advised but I accept that, by…

COST BITES 316: THE CLAIMANT HAS JUDGMENT FOR £175,380 BUT WHO (IF ANYONE) SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? A SURPRISING RESULT (JUST THINK "OUCH"..)

COST BITES 316: THE CLAIMANT HAS JUDGMENT FOR £175,380 BUT WHO (IF ANYONE) SHOULD PAY THE COSTS? A SURPRISING RESULT (JUST THINK “OUCH”..)

December 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It is not uncommon to see discussions in relation to who should pay the costs after a judgment is given.  This is a judgment with a twist, in that the court considered, at the end of protracted litigation, whether anyone…

COST BITES 315: A LACK OF AUTHORITATIVE CASE LAW DOES NOT JUSTIFY A DEPARTURE FROM THE GENERAL RULE THAT THE LOSING PARTY PAYS THE COSTS

COST BITES 315: A LACK OF AUTHORITATIVE CASE LAW DOES NOT JUSTIFY A DEPARTURE FROM THE GENERAL RULE THAT THE LOSING PARTY PAYS THE COSTS

December 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Should the fact that there is no authoritative case law on a topic lead to a “different” order as to costs.  This was one of the issues considered by the judge in this case.  Similarly the court considered the relevance…

MAZUR MATTERS 44: THE SRA STATES IT WILL TREAT "SYMPATHETICALLY" SELF-REPORTED INCIDENCES BASED ON MISTAKEN INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW

MAZUR MATTERS 44: THE SRA STATES IT WILL TREAT “SYMPATHETICALLY” SELF-REPORTED INCIDENCES BASED ON MISTAKEN INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW

December 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The SRA updated its guidance on “Mazur and conducting litigation” today.  This includes its likely approach to reports of past errors.   The SRA states that it will look on such issues “sympathetically”.  After all practising lawyers were not the only…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 41: HAD THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY?

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 41: HAD THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY?

December 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case

A party alleging fraud or dishonesty cannot “ambush” their opponent at trial.  Fraud must be fully particularised and pleaded.  Do identical principles apply to allegations of fundamental dishonesty?   In this case the judge considered an argument that points in relation…

THE HILLSBOROUGH REPORT AND THE AMENDMENT OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NEW INFORMATION IN THE IPOC REPORT PUBLISHED YESTERDAY

THE HILLSBOROUGH REPORT AND THE AMENDMENT OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NEW INFORMATION IN THE IPOC REPORT PUBLISHED YESTERDAY

December 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked at the issues relating to evidence gathering and the Hillsborough tragedy several times, in particular the way that witness statements were gathered, and the reports amended.  The issues were considered again in the Independent Office for…

MAZUR MATTERS 43: AN EXAMPLE WHERE SUPERVISION WAS FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE: ACTION BY THE SRA & A FINE OF £30,000

MAZUR MATTERS 43: AN EXAMPLE WHERE SUPERVISION WAS FOUND TO BE INADEQUATE: ACTION BY THE SRA & A FINE OF £30,000

December 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

It would be interesting to know what (if any) percentage of the profession read the SRA document “Effective supervision – Guidance” published in November 2022.  The Mazur issue was there in plain sight. There is only one practical example given in…

MAZUR MATTERS 42: CAN ANY GOOD COME OF ALL THIS?  POSITIVE THINKING ABOUT DELEGATION AND THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: SOME USEFUL LINKS

MAZUR MATTERS 42: CAN ANY GOOD COME OF ALL THIS? POSITIVE THINKING ABOUT DELEGATION AND THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: SOME USEFUL LINKS

December 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Well being

The current situation is that large parts of the profession are waiting, with bated breath, for a Court of Appeal judgment as to whether the Mazur decision was right, in particular in relation to non-authorised employees having the “conduct” of litigation. …

SERVICE POINTS 25:  DOES AN  EARLIER ORDER FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE BY EMAIL INCLUDE SERVICE OF AN APPLICATION TO COMMIT: SHOULD THE COURT  RETROSPECTIVELY AUTHORISED SERVICE?.

SERVICE POINTS 25: DOES AN EARLIER ORDER FOR SUBSTITUTED SERVICE BY EMAIL INCLUDE SERVICE OF AN APPLICATION TO COMMIT: SHOULD THE COURT RETROSPECTIVELY AUTHORISED SERVICE?.

December 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Serving documents

Here we consider an argument as to whether an application to commit for contempt was validly served. The respondent argued that the application needed to be served in person. The applicant’s argument was that there was in place an order…

MAZUR COMPLIANT SUPERVISION AND COST EFFECTIVE DELEGATION IN 2025: WEBINAR 5th DECEMBER 2025: "TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT"

MAZUR COMPLIANT SUPERVISION AND COST EFFECTIVE DELEGATION IN 2025: WEBINAR 5th DECEMBER 2025: “TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT”

November 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Webinar, Well being

With an appeal pending (at some indefinite time) and the profession still rife with uncertainty we need to consider, head on, issues relating to delegation and supervision.  Get this right and you will be part of a well run and…

INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED IN CASE WHERE CLAIMANTS OBTAINED INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS' SOLICITOR IN A "STING" OPERATION: "THE CLAIMANTS SOUGHT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE"

INDEMNITY COSTS ORDERED IN CASE WHERE CLAIMANTS OBTAINED INFORMATION FROM DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITOR IN A “STING” OPERATION: “THE CLAIMANTS SOUGHT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE”

November 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content

This is a case worth reading if you want to see strong judicial commentary on litigation conduct.  The judge was clear in his view of the conduct that the claimants had engaged in and surprised by its lack of self…

COST BITES 313: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT IS NOT GOING TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE THEY FAILED TO BEAT THEIR OWN OFFERS...

COST BITES 313: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT IS NOT GOING TO BE DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE THEY FAILED TO BEAT THEIR OWN OFFERS…

November 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

This is a case with some interesting arguments as to costs. The court considered allegations of a failure to engage in ADR; the fact that the claimants had not beaten their own offers and issues in relation to conduct, proportionality…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A JUDGE ASKING A WITNESS TO CLARIFY THEIR EVIDENCE IS NOT "BIASED" : "JUDGES ARE NOT PASSIVE SPECTATORS AT A TRIAL"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A JUDGE ASKING A WITNESS TO CLARIFY THEIR EVIDENCE IS NOT “BIASED” : “JUDGES ARE NOT PASSIVE SPECTATORS AT A TRIAL”

November 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

This week we are looking at an appeal that considers the trial judge’s consideration of witnesses at trial.  The appellant alleged that the judge was biased and the trial therefore unfair.  There is a detailed consideration of the “bias” alleged…

MAZUR MATTERS 41: CILEX GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL THE MAZUR JUDGMENT: BUT WHEN WILL IT BE HEARD?

MAZUR MATTERS 41: CILEX GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL THE MAZUR JUDGMENT: BUT WHEN WILL IT BE HEARD?

November 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

CILEX have been granted permission to appeal the Mazur judgment.  The primary question for the profession now is (i) when will the appeal be heard; (ii) what do we do in the meantime? Mazur remaining good law. (I wish CILEX…

MAZUR MATTERS 40: "A DAMNING INDICTMENT OF REGULATORY FAILURE": CHAIR OF THE LEGAL SERVICES CONSUMER PANEL PULLS NO PUNCHES...

MAZUR MATTERS 40: “A DAMNING INDICTMENT OF REGULATORY FAILURE”: CHAIR OF THE LEGAL SERVICES CONSUMER PANEL PULLS NO PUNCHES…

November 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The chair of the Legal Services Panel has given his strong views about the regulatory failures that the Mazur judgment shows.  With descriptions of “a study of regulatory incoherence”; “legal fiction”; “false assurance” and ” the fragmented, incoherent framework that…

ANOTHER FALSE  AND "HALLUCINATED" CITATION CASE: A SOLICITOR IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WORK DONE BY THEIR STAFF: WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE

ANOTHER FALSE AND “HALLUCINATED” CITATION CASE: A SOLICITOR IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WORK DONE BY THEIR STAFF: WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Wasted Costs

We have yet another case of “hallucinated” cases caused by artificial “intelligence” being cited in court.  These have the capacity to, and indeed do, land lawyers in very hot water.  Here false cases were put before the court in an…

COST BITES 310: COSTS,  CONDUCT AND ADR: THE DEFENDANTS HAD NOT BEEN UNREASONABLE IN THEIR APPROACH TO  MEDIATION: IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WHOLLY REASONABLE FOR THEM TO REFUSE TO MEDIATE IN ANY EVENT

COST BITES 310: COSTS, CONDUCT AND ADR: THE DEFENDANTS HAD NOT BEEN UNREASONABLE IN THEIR APPROACH TO MEDIATION: IT WOULD HAVE BEEN WHOLLY REASONABLE FOR THEM TO REFUSE TO MEDIATE IN ANY EVENT

November 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

The impact that a litigant has to mediation, and in particular a failure to properly respond to or participate in ADR, can have an impact on costs. However this is not automatic. Further there are cases (such as this) where…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND CONTEMPT OF COURT: CLAIMANT BROUGHT A FRAUDULENT £3 MILLION CLAIM: SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT IMPOSED

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AND CONTEMPT OF COURT: CLAIMANT BROUGHT A FRAUDULENT £3 MILLION CLAIM: SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT IMPOSED

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Committal proceedings, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked at cases of fundamental dishonesty many times. It has to be remembered that, more often than not, bringing dishonest claims is also contempt of court.  This case deals with the appropriate sentence that should be passed…

MAZUR MATTERS 39: CILEX APPLIES TO APPEAL MAZUR DECISION

MAZUR MATTERS 39: CILEX APPLIES TO APPEAL MAZUR DECISION

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

An announcement on the CILEX website today states that it is applying for permission to appeal the decision in Mazur.   The argument will be that, the Law Society, The SRA and the High Court construed the Solicitors Act incorrectly. Watch…

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (3): THE AGENCY THAT CARRIED OUT A STING OPERATION ON A (RETIRED) JUDGE, AMONG OTHERS...

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (3): THE AGENCY THAT CARRIED OUT A STING OPERATION ON A (RETIRED) JUDGE, AMONG OTHERS…

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct

If you think that the account of enquiry agents carrying out a sting operation on the other side’s solicitor is remarkable then sit down for a while. That judgment also reveals that (in wholly unrelated proceedings) the agency in question…

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are returning again to the case where the claimants arranged the taping of meetings with the defendants’ solicitors.  The judge was sceptical of the claimants’ assertions that they were not fully aware of the methods being used. (This case…

THE SOLICITOR AND THE "STING" OPERATION (1): THE METHODS USED TO EXTRACT INFORMATION FROM THE SOLICITOR: "HE WAS DECEIVED AND PLAYED FOR A FOOL..."

THE SOLICITOR AND THE “STING” OPERATION (1): THE METHODS USED TO EXTRACT INFORMATION FROM THE SOLICITOR: “HE WAS DECEIVED AND PLAYED FOR A FOOL…”

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

A party to an action hires an enquiry agent to deceive their opponent’s solicitor into giving them information. That scenario may seem far fetched but it is what actually happened in this this case.  It is worthwhile looking closely at…

THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITOR HAS BEEN "SET UP", SECRETLY RECORDED AND TOLD US THINGS HE SHOULD NOT: NOW WE WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THOSE RECORDINGS: QUITE A CASE THIS...

THE DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITOR HAS BEEN “SET UP”, SECRETLY RECORDED AND TOLD US THINGS HE SHOULD NOT: NOW WE WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON THOSE RECORDINGS: QUITE A CASE THIS…

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Summary judgment, Witness statements

Here we have an extraordinary case.  The claimants’ employed a private enquiry agent to meet, on a pretence, with the defendants’ solicitor.  That meeting was used by the enquiry agent to obtain information about the defendants’ case. It was videoed…

MAZUR MATTERS 38: THE GUIDANCE FROM THE SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY: "MAZUR AND CONDUCTING LITIGATION"

MAZUR MATTERS 38: THE GUIDANCE FROM THE SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY: “MAZUR AND CONDUCTING LITIGATION”

November 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Useful links

The SRA have a specific page which, in turn, provides links to SRA guidance and the Legal Services Act, itself.   These are useful links. They include a link to the SRA submissions in the Mazur case itself.   “The Legal…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (3): DOES THE ABSENCE OF A PENAL NOTICE PREVENT COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS? ARE THERE TWO TIERS OF COURT ORDER? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAS STRONG VIEWS…

November 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content

Does the absence of a penal notice on a court order mean that a party in default cannot be subject to committal proceedings?  This was the question addressed by the Court of Appeal in this case.  The possibility that litigants…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (2): THE CHIEF CONSTABLE IS THE PERSON WHO COPS IT

CONTEMPT OF COURT (2): THE CHIEF CONSTABLE IS THE PERSON WHO COPS IT

November 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content

We are continuing with the examination of the recent Court of Appeal decision on contempt of court.  In particular who is the entity in “contempt”? This may have far reaching consequences, as well as being specific to the actions of…

MAZUR MATTERS 37: USEFUL LINKS:  NEW GUIDANCE FROM THE LAW SOCIETY

MAZUR MATTERS 37: USEFUL LINKS: NEW GUIDANCE FROM THE LAW SOCIETY

November 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

The Law Society has earlier issued two new documents which are guides to Mazur.  One is outside a paywall, the other is not. “Mazur – answering your questions” deals with many key issues. (Links are important on this topic -…

CONTEMPT OF COURT (1) CONTEMPT NEED NOT BE "CONTUMELIOUS" (WHATEVER THAT MEANS): WHY CHIEF CONSTABLES, CHIEF EXECUTIVES, MINISTERS OF STATE AND BOSSES EVERYWHERE NEED TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO LITIGATION

CONTEMPT OF COURT (1) CONTEMPT NEED NOT BE “CONTUMELIOUS” (WHATEVER THAT MEANS): WHY CHIEF CONSTABLES, CHIEF EXECUTIVES, MINISTERS OF STATE AND BOSSES EVERYWHERE NEED TO PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO LITIGATION

November 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am breaking down this important Court of Appeal decision into a number of parts. We have already looked at the judgment as to the numerous “misleading” witness statements that were filed.  The Court of Appeal also makes important observations…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: "MISLEADING AND UNTRUE STATEMENTS... HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE COURT ON BEHALF OF THE CHIEF CONSTABLE" (COURT OF APPEAL ARE NOT HAPPY...)

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: “MISLEADING AND UNTRUE STATEMENTS… HAVE BEEN MADE TO THE COURT ON BEHALF OF THE CHIEF CONSTABLE” (COURT OF APPEAL ARE NOT HAPPY…)

November 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Witness statements

This week we are looking at a remarkable case.  Shortly before a matter was due to be heard in the Court of Appeal the respondent (the Chief Constable of a police force) filed documents which showed that numerous witness statements…

← Previous 1 2 3 … 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE "OPINION" EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014

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.