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 3
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…

APPEAL STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPELLANTS’ FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLIANT BUNDLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

All those involved in the appeal process, indeed litigation generally, are best advised to read this judgment.  It is about the standard the court’s expect when an appeal is being brought. It is also about procedural failures and failures to…

MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT "WITHOUT MORE"?

MAZUR MATTERS 35: DOES AN UNAUTHORISED PERSON SIGNING AN APPLICATION MEAN IT CAN BE STRUCK OUT “WITHOUT MORE”?

November 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we are looking at case report which contains a reference to Mazur and appears to suggest that signature of an application by an unauthorised person means that the application is “liable to be struck out”.  As it turns out…

COST BITES 306: ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD TOOK CIRCUMSTANCES OUT OF THE NORM: INSURER ORDERED TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE CLAIMANT

COST BITES 306: ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD TOOK CIRCUMSTANCES OUT OF THE NORM: INSURER ORDERED TO PAY INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE CLAIMANT

November 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Here we look at a case where the judge found that the defendant’s conduct in alleging fraud was such that costs should be ordered on the indemnity basis.  Among other things this judgment reminds us of the dangers of alleging…

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 2: (MIS) CONDUCT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 2: (MIS) CONDUCT IN THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Staying with the conference today.  Costs Judge Leonard gave an interesting talk on “conduct” in the assessment process which he, said was more accurately about “misconduct in the assessment process. (This was one of Judge Leonard’s slides. It highlights the…

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED

TALES FROM THE COSTS LAW CONFERENCE SOME BRIEF POINTS 1 : MAZUR ISSUES: WAS IT CORRECTLY DECIDED? WHY IT IS IMPORTANT THAT COST LAWYERS ARE REGULATED

November 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Today I am writing directly from the Association of Costs Lawyers conference in London. Unsurprisingly the first two speakers considered Mazur.  This is a highly abbreviated version of their talks.  ANDREW ROY KC Andrew, kindly referring to this blog as…

MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE

MAZUR MATTERS 33: MAZUR IN PARLIAMENT (2): THE LETTER FROM THE MINISTER TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE

November 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We continue with our rare trip inside the Houses of Parliament by looking at the response that the Minister for Courts and Legal Services to the letter from the  Chair of the Justice Committee.   (We are seeing how Mazur…

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR...

DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS CASES IN THE COURTS IN 2025: WEBINAR 12th NOVEMBER 2025: LOOKING AT MISTAKES IN LITIGATION TO AVOID REPEATS NEXT YEAR…

November 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Webinar

It is that time of year when we can look back and reflect on events of the previous 12 months. Here we are looking at what lessons can be learnt from cases on default and sanctions since November 2024.  As…

MAZUR MATTERS 31:   THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD REVIEW OF "WHY MAZUR WAS A SURPRISE"  - AND WHAT CHANGED AFTERWARDS?

MAZUR MATTERS 31: THE LEGAL SERVICES BOARD REVIEW OF “WHY MAZUR WAS A SURPRISE” – AND WHAT CHANGED AFTERWARDS?

November 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The Legal Services Board has set out the scope of its review of “advice and guidance provided to the profession on the conduct of litigation by approved regulators and regulatory bodies”.   Stripped down to its basics the question being asked…

MAZUR MATTERS 30: BREAKING NEWS:  LEGAL SERVICES BOARD GRANTS CILEX'S APPLICATION FOR STAND ALONE LITIGATION RIGHTS

MAZUR MATTERS 30: BREAKING NEWS: LEGAL SERVICES BOARD GRANTS CILEX’S APPLICATION FOR STAND ALONE LITIGATION RIGHTS

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The Legal Services Board has today approved an application from CILEx Regulation to allow legal executives to obtain standalone litigation practice rights.  Here we have the announcement and the Decision Notice.  The finer detail will be considered when it becomes…

MAZUR MATTERS 29: MORE  USEFUL LINKS: THE FOIL RESPONSE

MAZUR MATTERS 29: MORE USEFUL LINKS: THE FOIL RESPONSE

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Useful links

Here we are looking at another useful link.  FOIL (the Federation of Insurance Lawyers)  has produced a document dealing with the potential consequences of Mazur for its members. (FOIL has always been such a clever name.  This link shows that…

MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 28: IT WAS “SLIGHTLY SURPRISING” THAT A PARALEGAL “DID NOT KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT APPLICABLE TO NON-SOLICITORS”

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Here we look at a judge’s comments outside the ambit of litigation.  Nevertheless it shows that the issue of professional regulation and the use of “non-authorised” employees within solicitor’s firms may well become a more important issue in the future….

MAZUR MATTERS 27: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: A USEFUL GUIDE FROM INSURERS:  PLUS THE FIRST "REAL WORLD" CASE WHERE MAZUR HAS LED TO A SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN COSTS

MAZUR MATTERS 27: TWO MORE USEFUL LINKS: A USEFUL GUIDE FROM INSURERS: PLUS THE FIRST “REAL WORLD” CASE WHERE MAZUR HAS LED TO A SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN COSTS

October 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Sanctions, Useful links

The commentary on Mazur continues.  Here I want to look at two useful links. The first relates to guidance given by an insurer. The second relates to the first report (I have seen) on Mazur having an impact on costs….

MAZUR MATTERS 26: SHOULD THE PROFESSION HAVE SEEN THIS COMING? THERE WERE CLUES...: TODAY IS THE 18th ANNIVERSARY OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT 2007 COMING INTO FORCE: SHOULD WE HAVE BEEN SURPRISED?

MAZUR MATTERS 26: SHOULD THE PROFESSION HAVE SEEN THIS COMING? THERE WERE CLUES…: TODAY IS THE 18th ANNIVERSARY OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT 2007 COMING INTO FORCE: SHOULD WE HAVE BEEN SURPRISED?

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

The reason why we litigators are infinitely wise is that we always deal with things in retrospect. We have the perfect vision of hindsight.  Litigation is full of “why did you do that?”, “If you say that now why didn’t…

EXPERT WATCH 23: NOW THINGS GET EVEN MORE REMARKABLE: EXPERT WRITES TO THE COURT TO SAY "MY EVIDENCE WAS WRONG": REGULATORY BODY THINKS THE REPORT WAS VERY WRONG...

EXPERT WATCH 23: NOW THINGS GET EVEN MORE REMARKABLE: EXPERT WRITES TO THE COURT TO SAY “MY EVIDENCE WAS WRONG”: REGULATORY BODY THINKS THE REPORT WAS VERY WRONG…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The previous post recorded how it is still possible to be surprised by what goes on in litigation. We see that again here, but to a greater extent. After a trial and a judgment was given an expert wrote to…

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF...

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

No matter how long, and how much, you write about civil procedure cases can still come along which surprise – if not astonish. We have such a case here.  The judge found that, essentially, it was the client who played…

LIGHT IN ALL THE HEAT: ENSURING THAT AN AUTHORISED PERSON HAS "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION": A PRACTICAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 31st OCTOBER 2025

LIGHT IN ALL THE HEAT: ENSURING THAT AN AUTHORISED PERSON HAS “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”: A PRACTICAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 31st OCTOBER 2025

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Webinar

There are many heated responses to the Mazur decision.  There are articles suggesting that the judge got the law wrong. (Apparently the judge should not have listened to the submissions of both the Law Society and SRA which supported his…

COST BITES 300: THE SERIES TO DATE:  IT STARTED WITH A "BOUTIQUE FIRM", YESTERDAY IT WAS ABOUT CONDUCT,  AND IS UNLIKELY TO END SOON...

COST BITES 300: THE SERIES TO DATE: IT STARTED WITH A “BOUTIQUE FIRM”, YESTERDAY IT WAS ABOUT CONDUCT, AND IS UNLIKELY TO END SOON…

October 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Useful links

This series started in July 2022.  I wanted to make sure that we got to look at the “smaller” issues in relation to costs as well as major decisions.  Those “incidental” issues, summary assessments, judicial commentary and the like can…

MAZUR MATTERS 24: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" (5): THE MEANING OF "COURT" AND WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE NOT COVERED BY ACT

MAZUR MATTERS 24: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” (5): THE MEANING OF “COURT” AND WHAT ACTIVITIES ARE NOT COVERED BY ACT

October 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Here we continue with the examination of what is meant by the “conduct litigation” by looking at the Statute and Law Society Guidance as to the meaning of “court”. This extends to some, but not all, tribunals. (Some courts are…

MAZUR MATTERS 22: USEFUL LINKS: GUIDANCE FROM THE SRA (IN 2022) - WHICH SAID EXACTLY WHAT MAZUR SAID: A SITUATION HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT...

MAZUR MATTERS 22: USEFUL LINKS: GUIDANCE FROM THE SRA (IN 2022) – WHICH SAID EXACTLY WHAT MAZUR SAID: A SITUATION HIDING IN PLAIN SIGHT…

October 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Webinar

Here we look at guidance given by the SRA in  November 2022. The one thing that the SRA can point to is the fact that this guidance said, in clear terms,  precisely what was said in Mazur about who can…

EXPERT WATCH 20: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHEN THE PARTIES CANNOT AGREE INSTRUCTIONS TO A SINGLE JOINT EXPERT

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Here we are looking at a case where there was an issue as to the instructions given, or to be given, to a single joint expert.  The judge set out the basis upon which such experts are instructed and the…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 32: CLOSING SUBMISSIONS ARE NO PLACE TO TAKE A POINT THAT HAS NEVER BEEN PLEADED AT ALL

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 32: CLOSING SUBMISSIONS ARE NO PLACE TO TAKE A POINT THAT HAS NEVER BEEN PLEADED AT ALL

October 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we are looking at a case where there were manifold issues (“100s of allegations) and where evidence was given over several weeks.  However the claimant attempted to raise a new, unpleaded, issue during closing submissions.  As we shall see…

MAZUR MATTERS 18: WHAT DIFFERENCE WILL MAZUR MAKE TO THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS? HOW ABOUT - ABSOLUTELY NONE...

MAZUR MATTERS 18: WHAT DIFFERENCE WILL MAZUR MAKE TO THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS? HOW ABOUT – ABSOLUTELY NONE…

October 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

Much has been written about Mazur, this includes many “column inches” about the implications for inter parties and solicitor and own client costs. However there is some support for the proposition that the fact that an “unauthorised” litigator has not…

SHOULD THE DEFENDANT BE ORDERED TO PAY THE CLAIMANT'S COSTS WHEN IT RAN AN UNSUCCESSFUL ARGUMENT AS TO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY? A HIGH COURT DECISION

SHOULD THE DEFENDANT BE ORDERED TO PAY THE CLAIMANT’S COSTS WHEN IT RAN AN UNSUCCESSFUL ARGUMENT AS TO FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY? A HIGH COURT DECISION

October 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

There has been much debate recently about whether assertions of fundamental dishonesty have been made too readily.  This case makes it clear that there may be costs consequences for those who run such arguments but who do not succeed.  This…

MAZUR MATTERS 15: COULD BREACHES OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT? WHY YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ

MAZUR MATTERS 15: COULD BREACHES OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT? WHY YOU SHOULDN’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ

October 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I have gently, perhaps too gently, suggested that a great deal of what is being written and said about the impact of Mazur is “unhelpful”.  Put more bluntly some of it is inaccurate and misleading.  There is much “wishful thinking”…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 4: THE DANGERS OF PLEADING ALLEGATIONS OF NEGLIGENCE WITHOUT APPROPRIATE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT (LESSONS HERE FOR ALL LITIGATORS)

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 4: THE DANGERS OF PLEADING ALLEGATIONS OF NEGLIGENCE WITHOUT APPROPRIATE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT (LESSONS HERE FOR ALL LITIGATORS)

October 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Statements of Case, Wasted Costs

There have been several cases dealing with inadequate pleading in clinical negligence cases this year. Here we look at one of them.  It is a case we have looked at already but I wanted to emphasise the point.  Further this…

MAZUR MATTERS 14: ENSURING THAT AN AUTHORISED PERSON HAS "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION": A PRACTICAL GUIDE: WEBINAR ON 31st OCTOBER 2025

MAZUR MATTERS 14: ENSURING THAT AN AUTHORISED PERSON HAS “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”: A PRACTICAL GUIDE: WEBINAR ON 31st OCTOBER 2025

October 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs

As all readers of this blog will now by now The decision in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) means that solicitors must ensure that an “authorised person” has conduct of litigation.  A failure to…

MAZUR MATTERS 12: WHAT IS MEANT BY "THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" 3: JUDGMENT ON WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION

MAZUR MATTERS 12: WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 3: JUDGMENT ON WHAT IS NOT THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION

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

We are continuing with the detailed look at the consequences of the Mazur case.  Here we look at that part of a judgment where the court made clear findings as to what did not constitute the conduct of litigation. (Staying outside…

MAZUR MATTERS 11: WHAT IS MEANT BY "THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" 2 (A) : WHEN SOMEBODY BREACHED THE ACT AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BY ARRANGING FOR THE SERVICE OF PLEADINGS

MAZUR MATTERS 11: WHAT IS MEANT BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 2 (A) : WHEN SOMEBODY BREACHED THE ACT AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BY ARRANGING FOR THE SERVICE OF PLEADINGS

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Comment on the implications  of the Mazur decision goes on unabated.  Some of this is informed commentary, some it is definitely not.  On this site we are going to continue the examination of the primary sources of assistance to litigators…

MAZUR RECORDING - NOW AVAILABLE

MAZUR RECORDING – NOW AVAILABLE

October 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Webinar

The webinar on Mazur I did last Friday is now available from Steve Cornforth who kindly arranged it. Details are below. (You can watch the recording on any screen you like – well nearly…) HOW TO GET IN TOUCH WITH…

MAZUR MATTERS 10: THE STATUTORY DEFENCE TO THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE: WHY YOU (PROBABLY) WON'T GO TO JAIL: BUT THE POSITION GOING FORWARD MAY BE DIFFERENT...

MAZUR MATTERS 10: THE STATUTORY DEFENCE TO THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE: WHY YOU (PROBABLY) WON’T GO TO JAIL: BUT THE POSITION GOING FORWARD MAY BE DIFFERENT…

October 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

A person unlawfully “conducting” litigation can be imprisoned for up to two years, be fined and is also in contempt of court.    This makes uncomfortable reading for many. However there is a statutory defence.  There is useful case law…

MAZUR MATTERS 9: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION"?  (2): AN EARLY COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WHICH HELPS

MAZUR MATTERS 9: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”? (2): AN EARLY COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WHICH HELPS

October 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are continuing with a detailed examination of the cases and principles relating to what is meant by the “conduct of litigation”.  Here (with some major caveats in mind) we look at the Court of Appeal decision that has been…

PART 36: SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION SO THAT THE NORMAL PART 36 PROVISIONS DO NOT APPLY? THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE "FORMIDABLE OBSTACLE"...

PART 36: SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION SO THAT THE NORMAL PART 36 PROVISIONS DO NOT APPLY? THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE “FORMIDABLE OBSTACLE”…

October 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we have a case where the court considered the defendant’s argument that the normal provisions of Part 36 should not apply when that defendant had failed to beat a claimant’s Part 36 offer.  The burden on a party arguing…

MAZUR MATTERS 8: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" (1): HOW HELPFUL ARE THE REGULATORS?

MAZUR MATTERS 8: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” (1): HOW HELPFUL ARE THE REGULATORS?

October 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct

This is the start of a new sub-series concentrating on one issue. We will be looking at what has become one of the key matters of concern for many litigators – what is meant by the “conduct of litigation”.   There…

MAZUR MATTERS 7: LINKS TO SOME USEFUL RESOURCES: SOME INTERESTING READING FOR THE WEEKEND...

MAZUR MATTERS 7: LINKS TO SOME USEFUL RESOURCES: SOME INTERESTING READING FOR THE WEEKEND…

October 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content

I have just finished presenting a webinar on the Mazur decision.  I have a distinct feeling that this will not be the last. It was the first time I can remember where the time spent on questions afterwards exceeded the…

MAZUR MATTERS 6: FURTHER GUIDANCE FROM CILEX: "FIRMS WILL NEED TO SATISFY THEMSELVES THAT THEY ARE COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW"

MAZUR MATTERS 6: FURTHER GUIDANCE FROM CILEX: “FIRMS WILL NEED TO SATISFY THEMSELVES THAT THEY ARE COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW”

October 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

CILEX have provided further guidance in a document produced yesterday “CILEx Regulation – Interim Guidance The conduct of litigation and supervision”. (It may not be too late to register for the webinar on this topic today at 12.00 – details…

MAZUR MATTERS 5: THE SRA STATEMENT: "WE KNEW THE LAW ALL ALONG" (WITH NO EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THEY GOT IT WRONG)

MAZUR MATTERS 5: THE SRA STATEMENT: “WE KNEW THE LAW ALL ALONG” (WITH NO EXPLANATION AS TO HOW THEY GOT IT WRONG)

October 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

Along with the reminder that the webinar on Mazur is on Friday 3rd October (details available here)  it is notable that SRA issued a statement on Mazur yesterday. The full text of which is below.  There is no hint of…

← Previous 1 2 3 4 … 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.