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 4
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…

MAZUR MATTERS 4:  DOES MAZUR COVER ANYTHING PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF PROCEEDINGS?  THREE CASES THAT CONSIDER THE ISSUE

MAZUR MATTERS 4: DOES MAZUR COVER ANYTHING PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF PROCEEDINGS? THREE CASES THAT CONSIDER THE ISSUE

October 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The webinar on Friday the 3rd October will deal with many of the major issues that arise from the the decision in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB). Here we consider the issue relating to…

MAZUR MATTERS 3: CILEX MEMBERS - THE REAL VICTIMS OF ALL THIS: WHAT CILEX MEMBERS CAN DO ABOUT THIS

MAZUR MATTERS 3: CILEX MEMBERS – THE REAL VICTIMS OF ALL THIS: WHAT CILEX MEMBERS CAN DO ABOUT THIS

October 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

If any members of the profession are entitled to be disgruntled (to put it mildly) about the decision in Mazur it is CILEX members who conduct litigation. They have hard earned qualifications and extensive experience. However, unless they come within…

COST BITES 294: "A DETAILED ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE FORUM TO RESCUE OR TO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE EFFECT OF A POORLY WORDED ORDER": THE COURT WOULD NOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF POTENTIAL FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTYOF THE PRIMARY ACTION ON ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 294: “A DETAILED ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE FORUM TO RESCUE OR TO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE EFFECT OF A POORLY WORDED ORDER”: THE COURT WOULD NOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF POTENTIAL FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTYOF THE PRIMARY ACTION ON ASSESSMENT

September 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Uncategorized

Here we are looking at an attempt by a paying party defendant to raise issues of conduct, including potential fundamental dishonesty, at the assessment of costs stage.  The defendant argued (or attempted to argue) that the costs judge should take…

MAZUR MATTERS 2: THE ROLE OF THE SOLICITORS REGULATORY AUTHORITY : THE REGULATOR THAT GOT THE LAW WRONG AND IS NOW "PONDERING" WHAT TO DO...

MAZUR MATTERS 2: THE ROLE OF THE SOLICITORS REGULATORY AUTHORITY : THE REGULATOR THAT GOT THE LAW WRONG AND IS NOW “PONDERING” WHAT TO DO…

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

The webinar on Friday the 3rd October will deal with many of the major issues that arise from the the decision in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB).  One interesting aspect of the case is…

PROVING THINGS 269: PROVING THAT A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST: IS TURNING A "BLIND EYE" ENOUGH?

PROVING THINGS 269: PROVING THAT A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST: IS TURNING A “BLIND EYE” ENOUGH?

September 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

This is an important and interesting case about findings of dishonesty on the part of a practising solicitor in their failure to make relevant checks on the background of their client. It was not suggested that the solicitor was aware…

MAZUR MATTERS 1: THE PENALTIES FOR NON-QUALIFIED STAFF CONDUCTING LITIGATION (AKA "HOW MUCH TIME COULD I SERVE")

MAZUR MATTERS 1: THE PENALTIES FOR NON-QUALIFIED STAFF CONDUCTING LITIGATION (AKA “HOW MUCH TIME COULD I SERVE”)

September 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

The webinar on Friday the 3rd October will deal with many of the major issues that arise from the the decision in Mazur & Anor v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB). However it is clear that it…

ISSUING AN INJUNCTION MEANS "PROCEEDINGS" ARE UNDERWAY AND THE CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AFTER IT WAS SET ASIDE: ALLOWING THE CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENTS IN THIS  APPEAL WOULD BE AN "AFFRONT TO COMMONSENSE"

ISSUING AN INJUNCTION MEANS “PROCEEDINGS” ARE UNDERWAY AND THE CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AFTER IT WAS SET ASIDE: ALLOWING THE CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS IN THIS APPEAL WOULD BE AN “AFFRONT TO COMMONSENSE”

September 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Injunctions, Members Content

Here we look at an ingenious argument about the meaning of “proceedings” and the costs consequences if a claimant has an injunction order set aside.  The claimant argued that the nature of the action he pursued did not amount to…

MORE ABOUT WHO CAN PROPERLY "CONDUCT LITIGATION": THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LAW SOCIETY AND SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY: "TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT"

MORE ABOUT WHO CAN PROPERLY “CONDUCT LITIGATION”: THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LAW SOCIETY AND SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY: “TASKS MAY BE DELEGATED BUT CONDUCT OF THE LITIGATION MAY NOT”

September 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

As I said yesterday the matters discussed in the recent judgment about whether a fee earner can conduct litigation may have a widespread impact. It is important that litigators are aware of the views of the Law Society and the…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: "HIS EVIDENCE WAS FREQUENTLY AGGRESSIVE AND SARCASTIC": SOMETIMES WITNESSES DO NOT HELP THEMSELVES

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: “HIS EVIDENCE WAS FREQUENTLY AGGRESSIVE AND SARCASTIC”: SOMETIMES WITNESSES DO NOT HELP THEMSELVES

September 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I have been considering a series on judicial observations on witness evidence for some time. It seems like a good idea to put this in the middle of the week so we have a regular reminder of how significant these…

A DECISION OF PROFOUND PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE TO SOLICITORS: WHEN IS SOMEONE EMPLOYED BY A SOLICITOR ENTITLED TO “CONDUCT” LITIGATION? A HIGH COURT DECISION THAT WILL HAVE WIDESPREAD RAMIFICATIONS

September 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are looking at a High Court decision that could have major ramifications for the way in which firms of solicitors organise their practices. In particular in relation to the qualifications of staff who conduct litigation, what is meant by…

THREE WEBINARS ON EXPERTS: THE JOINT EXPERT AND MEETING OF EXPERTS; PART 35 QUESTIONS AND EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2025

THREE WEBINARS ON EXPERTS: THE JOINT EXPERT AND MEETING OF EXPERTS; PART 35 QUESTIONS AND EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2025

September 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Webinar

The way in which the “Expert Watch” series has quickly developed shows that issues relating to expert evidence continue to give rise to problems.  These three webinars explore many of the major issues in relation to experts. Dealing with the…

BARRISTER REFERRED TO THE BSB BECAUSE OF THE USE OF AI "HALLUCINATED" CASES: IGNORANCE THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING IS NO DEFENCE

BARRISTER REFERRED TO THE BSB BECAUSE OF THE USE OF AI “HALLUCINATED” CASES: IGNORANCE THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING IS NO DEFENCE

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

We have another example of a lawyer getting into trouble (potentially very serious trouble) through the use of Artificial Intelligence and its ability to “hallucinate” cases.  It was accepted that the error was not deliberate.  However the Upper Tribunal pointed…

COST BITES 285: DOES THE COURT NEED TO VARY THE RECEIVING PARTY'S BUDGET WHEN IT HAS ORDERED THAT COSTS BE PAID ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS?

COST BITES 285: DOES THE COURT NEED TO VARY THE RECEIVING PARTY’S BUDGET WHEN IT HAS ORDERED THAT COSTS BE PAID ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS?

September 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

We are looking again at the award of indemnity costs.  The judge ordered that costs be paid  to the claimant on the indemnity basis.  He then went on to consider whether, given that decision, it was necessary to retrospectively vary…

THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 2: WHERE DO YOU LOOK WHEN FACED WITH AN ARGUMENT  ON ASSESSEMENT THAT COSTS SHOULD BE REDUCED BECAUSE OF "PROPORTIONALITY"?

THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 2: WHERE DO YOU LOOK WHEN FACED WITH AN ARGUMENT ON ASSESSEMENT THAT COSTS SHOULD BE REDUCED BECAUSE OF “PROPORTIONALITY”?

September 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

The principles considered here work for both sides.  Where does a receiving party look when the paying party wants to reduce costs because of “proportionality”? Where does a paying party look to gain guidance on such issues.   I am here…

COST BITES 274: IN CONSIDERING WHETHER TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS HOW RELEVANT IS A  DEFENDANT'S WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER? (THE CLAIMANT THAT TURNED DOWN $50 MILLION DOLLARS - AND THEN LOST AT TRIAL...

COST BITES 274: IN CONSIDERING WHETHER TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS HOW RELEVANT IS A DEFENDANT’S WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER? (THE CLAIMANT THAT TURNED DOWN $50 MILLION DOLLARS – AND THEN LOST AT TRIAL…

August 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Here we look at a short judgment on costs.  The judge considered whether an indemnity costs should be made and the date from which the indemnity costs order should take effect.   There were several factors specific to this case, however…

COST BITES 272: CLAIMANTS ORDERED TO PAY SOME OF A DEFENDANT'S COSTS IMMEDIATELY, PRIOR TO JUDGMENT BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE TRIAL WAS CONDUCTED

COST BITES 272: CLAIMANTS ORDERED TO PAY SOME OF A DEFENDANT’S COSTS IMMEDIATELY, PRIOR TO JUDGMENT BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE TRIAL WAS CONDUCTED

August 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs, Witness statements

Last week we had a judge discussing the “pay as you go” principle in litigation.  Here we have a slight extension of that principle with the judge deciding that the claimants’ conduct of the the trial meant that they should…

EXPERT WATCH 9: FAILURES TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND TO INFORM THE EXPERTS OF THE DEFENDANT'S CASE COULD RENDER THE EVIDENCE "USELESS": AN EXPENSIVE DAY OUT FOR THE CLAIMANTS' SOLICITORS...

EXPERT WATCH 9: FAILURES TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND TO INFORM THE EXPERTS OF THE DEFENDANT’S CASE COULD RENDER THE EVIDENCE “USELESS”: AN EXPENSIVE DAY OUT FOR THE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITORS…

August 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Here we look at a decision not about the conduct of experts but the way in which the experts were instructed and failure to comply with pre-action protocols.  On the face of it this is a decision of major importance…

HOW NOT TO APPLY TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT WHICH IS ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN OBTAINED BY FRAUD: THE JUDGE MARKED THE "ILL CONSIDERED AND POOR MANNER IN WHICH THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN PREPARED AND PROSECUTED"

HOW NOT TO APPLY TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT WHICH IS ALLEGED TO HAVE BEEN OBTAINED BY FRAUD: THE JUDGE MARKED THE “ILL CONSIDERED AND POOR MANNER IN WHICH THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN PREPARED AND PROSECUTED”

August 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

It is possible to apply to set aside a previous judgment when the applicant’s case is that that judgment was obtained by fraud.  However here we look at an almost textbook example of how not to go about this.  The court…

EXPERT WATCH 7: “THIS CASE IS NOT SHORT OF ADVOCATES”: AN EXPERT REPORTING FOR THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ONE OF THEM: FURTHER THEY SHOULD HAVE DISCLOSED THAT THEY HAD “COPIED” THEIR REPORT

August 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Yesterday I imposed a 24 hour respite on this series “unless something really interesting comes up”.  I have broken that promise, it lasted 22 hours. However the cases on experts keep coming in and, I think, readers need to know…

EXPERT WATCH 4: THE EXPERT SHOULD INFORM THE COURT IF MEMBERSHIP OF A PROFESSIONAL ORGANISATION HAD CEASED, PARTICULARLY IF THIS IS LINKED TO DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM

July 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are returning (and not for the last time) to a recent decision where the court considered the expert evidence in detail. Here we look at the judgment in relation to an expert who failed, until prompted, to inform the…

COST BITES 258: APPLICANT'S FAILURE TO ACCEPT SUGGESTION IN A LETTER LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING MADE AGAINST IT

COST BITES 258: APPLICANT’S FAILURE TO ACCEPT SUGGESTION IN A LETTER LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING MADE AGAINST IT

July 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

We are looking at a case where the judge found that an applicant should have accepted a suggestion that their application be withdrawn. Because they did not take up that application the applicant was ordered to pay costs on the…

HOW NOT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE - AN OBJECT LESSON: "THE APPLICATION WAS... FATALLY FLAWED FROM THE OUTSET AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE"

HOW NOT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE – AN OBJECT LESSON: “THE APPLICATION WAS… FATALLY FLAWED FROM THE OUTSET AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE”

July 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

Today we are looking at a case that everyone involved in making an application for non-party disclosure should read. The Master was highly critical of the applicant’s conduct of the application and the evidence in support. It proved to be…

"HALLUCINATED CASES" LEAD TO PARTY SUCCEEDING AT FIRST INSTANCE: THE COURT OF APPEALS OVERTURNS THE DECISION - BUT RESPONDENT RELIED ON ANOTHER HALLUCINATED CASE IN AN ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN COSTS...

“HALLUCINATED CASES” LEAD TO PARTY SUCCEEDING AT FIRST INSTANCE: THE COURT OF APPEALS OVERTURNS THE DECISION – BUT RESPONDENT RELIED ON ANOTHER HALLUCINATED CASE IN AN ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN COSTS…

July 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Written advocacy

Here we look at another case where a party to litigation relied on “hallucinated” cases – created by Artificial Intelligence.  The impact of those cases here were potentially more profound in that a party’s case – based on those false…

COST BITES 257: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENTS AND "UNUSUAL COSTS": WHY THE ATTENDANCE NOTE IS OFTEN THE SOLICITOR'S BEST FRIEND

COST BITES 257: SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENTS AND “UNUSUAL COSTS”: WHY THE ATTENDANCE NOTE IS OFTEN THE SOLICITOR’S BEST FRIEND

July 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

A solicitor is under a  specific duty to warn the client when “unusual costs “are being incurred, particularly those costs that may be irrecoverable on an inter party basis.  Here we have an example of a (former) client asserting that…

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 3: INADEQUATE ATTENDANCE NOTE LEADS TO WOEFUL RESULTS: THE APPEAL THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 3: INADEQUATE ATTENDANCE NOTE LEADS TO WOEFUL RESULTS: THE APPEAL THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED

July 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,

Here we are looking at a decision where manifold service failures on the part of solicitors were identified.  However we will look at one issue – the consequences of an attendance note not being full and complete. Counsel advised on…

COST BITES 255: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE:  LEGAL OMBUDSMAN HOLDS THAT A FIRM ACTING ON A DBA CANNOT BE PAID TWICE FOR THE SAME WORK: FULL REFUND ORDERED (WITH INTEREST)

COST BITES 255: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: LEGAL OMBUDSMAN HOLDS THAT A FIRM ACTING ON A DBA CANNOT BE PAID TWICE FOR THE SAME WORK: FULL REFUND ORDERED (WITH INTEREST)

July 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

The courts have, on occasion, indicated that the legal ombudsman may be a more cost effective way of resolving solicitor and own client costs disputes than expensive litigation. We are looking at such a case here, an ombudsman decision in…

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 12 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

  • AN APPLICATION TO SET A DEFAULT JUDGMENT ASIDE (2): CONSIDERATION OF “PROMPTNESS” WHEN NOTHING HAPPENED FOR A YEAR…
  • THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 6: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”? (IT TURNS OUT ITS A MATTER OF “PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT”)
  • AN APPLICATION TO SET A DEFAULT JUDGMENT ASIDE (1): THE EVIDENCE AS TO THE MERITS: THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE CONDUCTED A “MINI TRIAL”
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EVIDENCE BY VIDEO LINK FROM ABROAD: A POINT TO WATCH : SOME USEFUL GUIDANCE AND PRACTICAL STEPS
  • EXPERT WATCH 51: THE EXPERT VALUERS SHOULD HAVE GONE INTO THIS EXERCISE “BLIND” – THEIR CREDIBILITY WOULD BE “MUCH IMPROVED”

Top Posts

NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES' COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
COST BITES 403: JUDGMENT TODAY: SUCCESS FEE AND ATE PREMIUM NOT PAYABLE BY CLIENT WHEN THE SOLICITOR FAILED TO MAKE REASONABLE ENQUIRIES ABOUT BTE INSURANCE
DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGES SHOULD BE CAREFUL WHO IS GIVEN THE TASK OF TRYING COMPLEX TRIALS: COURT OF APPEAL MISSIVE TO DESIGNATED CIVIL JUDGES (& MANY OTHERS...)
A NEW SERIES OF USEFUL ONLINE CALCULATORS FOR LITIGATORS AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION (WITH A 20% DISCOUNT FOR CLB READERS): MAKING IT ALL ADD UP
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT: HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS: KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS

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.