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 9
EXPERTS WHO CAN'T REPORT IN TIME: BETTER READ THIS: IF YOU CAN'T REPORT ON TIME PROBABLY BEST NOT TO TAKE INSTRUCTIONS AT ALL...

EXPERTS WHO CAN’T REPORT IN TIME: BETTER READ THIS: IF YOU CAN’T REPORT ON TIME PROBABLY BEST NOT TO TAKE INSTRUCTIONS AT ALL…

March 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In X and Y (Delay : Professional Conduct of Expert) [2019] EWFC B9 HH Clifford Bellamy (sitting as a Deputy Circuit Judge) made some observations in relation to the role of the expert, particularly when that expert cannot report timeously.  The…

ALLEGED "MISCONDUCT" DURING ASSESSMENT PROCESS DID NOT LEAD TO COSTS BEING DISALLOWED OR REDUCED: ATE PREMIUM WAS REASONABLE

ALLEGED “MISCONDUCT” DURING ASSESSMENT PROCESS DID NOT LEAD TO COSTS BEING DISALLOWED OR REDUCED: ATE PREMIUM WAS REASONABLE

March 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Murray v Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 539 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart rejected an argument that mistakes made by a claimant during the assessment of costs process should have led to costs being disallowed or reduced. The…

THE DANGERS OF TAKING A ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENT - A RECAP

THE DANGERS OF TAKING A ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENT – A RECAP

February 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

A number of recent posts have looked at difficulties caused the the way in which evidence was collected and witness statements drafted.  The taking of one-sided witness statements led to major difficulties for the party who were attempting to rely…

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

February 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post looked at the witness evidence of some of the claimants against one of the defendants in the case of Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC).  Here we look at the…

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

February 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There was report in the Scottish newspaper The Herald earlier this week about disciplinary proceedings being brought against a doctor who had prepared a “misleading and inaccurate” medical report. In essence the expert reported, as facts, matters that the interviewee…

WHEN LITIGATION BECOMES A "VERBAL BRAWL": DISCLOSURE MUST BE PROPORTIONATE

WHEN LITIGATION BECOMES A “VERBAL BRAWL”: DISCLOSURE MUST BE PROPORTIONATE

February 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Disclosure, Members Content

In Canary Riverside Estate Management Ltd v Circus Apartments Ltd [2019] EWHC 154 (Ch) Master Shuman observed how disclosure applications could quickly become disproportional. The litigation had become a “verbal brawl”. It is an example of the dangers of losing sight…

WHEN YOU'VE SPENT ALL YOUR MONEY ON LEGAL COSTS: NO REMEDY AVAILABLE: LITTLE SYMPATHY WHEN YOUR NET INCOME IS THE SAME AS A CIRCUIT JUDGE

WHEN YOU’VE SPENT ALL YOUR MONEY ON LEGAL COSTS: NO REMEDY AVAILABLE: LITTLE SYMPATHY WHEN YOUR NET INCOME IS THE SAME AS A CIRCUIT JUDGE

January 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

This blog usually looks at family cases in the context of evidence or costs.  The decision in Daga v Bangur [2018] EWFC 91 has a salutary tale to tell in relation to costs. There is also an interesting comparison in relation…

DETAILED ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT OVERSTEP THE MARK: THE COURTS WILL NOT (GENERALLY) REVISIT MATTERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE CASE ON ASSESSMENT

DETAILED ASSESSMENTS WILL NOT OVERSTEP THE MARK: THE COURTS WILL NOT (GENERALLY) REVISIT MATTERS RELATING TO THE CONDUCT OF THE CASE ON ASSESSMENT

January 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting and important  judgment by Deputy Master Friston in  Andrews v Retro Computers Ltd [2019] EWHC B2 (Costs) which highlights the dangers of attempting to use detailed assessment as a means of challenging the receiving party’s conduct.   I…

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT'S APPROACH LEADS TO "SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT'S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT": A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ - NOW

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT’S APPROACH LEADS TO “SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT’S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT”: A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ – NOW

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

The judgment of Mr Justice Males in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) is one of the most robust I have seen in relation to expert evidence. An expert’s failure to properly engage…

"A MISUSE OF JUDICIAL POWER":  A WITNESS SPEAKING TO LAWYER IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE  DOES NOT JUSTIFY COMMITTAL OR STRIKING OUT A CASE

“A MISUSE OF JUDICIAL POWER”: A WITNESS SPEAKING TO LAWYER IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE DOES NOT JUSTIFY COMMITTAL OR STRIKING OUT A CASE

January 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Striking out

In the judgment today in Hughes Jarvis Ltd v Searle & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ the Court of Appeal robustly overturned a decision committing a witness to prison and striking out a case.  It was found that the trial judge had,…

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY PRE-ACTION COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL

DEFENDANT ORDERED TO PAY COSTS AFTER REFUSING TO PAY PRE-ACTION COSTS: COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO GIVE PERMISSION TO APPEAL

January 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

In November last year I wrote about the case of Ayton -v- RSM Bentley Bennison & Ors [2018] EWHC 2851 (QB).  This was a case in which the defendant refused to pay cost incurred prior to issue. Proceedings were issued and…

THE CONSEQUENCES WHEN SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM GOES WRONG: SOLICITOR'S LIEN OVERRIDDEN: NOT KNOWING THE RULES IN RELATION TO SERVICE AMOUNTS TO "MISCONDUCT"

THE CONSEQUENCES WHEN SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM GOES WRONG: SOLICITOR’S LIEN OVERRIDDEN: NOT KNOWING THE RULES IN RELATION TO SERVICE AMOUNTS TO “MISCONDUCT”

December 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The judgment in Higgins & Ors v TLT LLP [2017] EWHC 3868 (Ch) shows another case that has been made problematic because of basic errors in failure of service of the claim form. The errors made by the solicitors in that…

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

A STRATEGY WHEN SETTLEMENT IS REACHED WITH SOME, BUT NOT ALL, DEFENDANTS

December 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Parties to actions

An earlier post dealt with the judgment in  McDermott -v- Inhealth Limited (19/07/2018) in relation to costs liability when a claimant settled against some, but not all, defendants in a clinical negligence case. That judgment was sent to me by Thomas Riis-Bristow, Associate…

COSTS AND "ABSURD" CONDUCT IN LITIGATION: HOW TO WASTE £1 MILLION...

COSTS AND “ABSURD” CONDUCT IN LITIGATION: HOW TO WASTE £1 MILLION…

December 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

This blog rarely looks at family cases. When it does it is often in relation to costs.  Which is why the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in ABX v SBX [2018] EWFC 81 caught my eye. It raises one fundamental dilemma…

CASES MUST BE DECIDED ON EVIDENCE RATHER THAN PREJUDICE: JUDGE TELLING COUNSEL TO "GET A LIFE" MAY INDICATE PREJUDGMENT

CASES MUST BE DECIDED ON EVIDENCE RATHER THAN PREJUDICE: JUDGE TELLING COUNSEL TO “GET A LIFE” MAY INDICATE PREJUDGMENT

December 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Vassilliou -v- The NFU Mutual Insurance Society Limited (Central London County Court 9th July 2018) Mr Recorder Cohen Q.C. allowed an appeal by a claimant.  He held that issues of mitigation of loss can only relate to matters that…

RUN UP COSTS OF £1.4 MILLION: EXPECT TO PAY A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM YOURSELF: "NO ONE ENTERS LITIGATION SIMPLY EXPECTING A BLANK CHEQUE"

RUN UP COSTS OF £1.4 MILLION: EXPECT TO PAY A LARGE CHUNK OF THEM YOURSELF: “NO ONE ENTERS LITIGATION SIMPLY EXPECTING A BLANK CHEQUE”

November 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There are interesting (and important) observations on the running up of costs in the judgment of Mr Justice Francis in WG v HG [2018] EWFC 70.  This blog does not normally follow family law cases. However the question of costs is…

THE EFFECT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER : DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO COSTS, BUT LED TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS THROUGHOUT

THE EFFECT OF A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER : DEFENDANTS NOT ENTITLED TO COSTS, BUT LED TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS THROUGHOUT

November 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

There is an interesting judgment in Britned Development Ltd v ABB AB & Anor [2018] EWHC 3142 (Ch) which should be read by anyone thinking of withdrawing a Part 36 offer.   The defendants in this case made a Part 36 offer…

THE DANGERS OF BEING "BULLISH" ON PROCEDURAL ISSUES: APPLICATION DISMISSED (AND IT TOOK TOO LONG)

THE DANGERS OF BEING “BULLISH” ON PROCEDURAL ISSUES: APPLICATION DISMISSED (AND IT TOOK TOO LONG)

November 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Witness statements

In Red Bull GmbH v Big Horn UK Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2794 (Ch) Master Clark completed the judgment”I conclude by noting the regrettable extent to which this judgment has been lengthened by the determination of the procedural points of…

PROVING THINGS 131: IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THE COURT SHOULD NOT DRAW INFERENCES IN SOLICITOR'S COSTS CASE

PROVING THINGS 131: IN THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE THE COURT SHOULD NOT DRAW INFERENCES IN SOLICITOR’S COSTS CASE

October 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

The judgment in  Gill v Heer Manak Solicitors [2018] EWHC 2881 (QB) is one of those cases that will get costs lawyers excited.  However it is not so much a case about costs as a case about evidence, or the absence…

"PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED": ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

“PUT BLUNTLY THESE ARGUMENTS ARE MISCONCEIVED”: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT IN A VERY ROBUST MOOD OVER COSTS

October 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Kay, R (On the Application Of) v Scan-Thors (UK) Ltd & Anor (Costs) [2018] EWHC 2842 (Admin) the Divisional Court dealt robustly with arguments made by an interested party attempting to resist an order for costs. “Put bluntly, these submissions…

COSTS IN AN ESTATE CLAIM:  REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION WAS A FACTOR TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION

COSTS IN AN ESTATE CLAIM: REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION WAS A FACTOR TO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION

October 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister  James Miller  for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Truman in Nicholls -v- Nicholls (19th June 2018), available here   NICH19062018APP.  The judgment is solely concerned with costs in relation to an action…

INDEMNITY COSTS: CAN BE AWARDED WHEN CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES FOUR DAYS INTO A SIX WEEK TRIAL

INDEMNITY COSTS: CAN BE AWARDED WHEN CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES FOUR DAYS INTO A SIX WEEK TRIAL

October 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Hosking & Anor v Apax Partners LLP & Ors [2018] EWHC 2732 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard awarded indemnity costs in a case where the claimant discontinued four days into a six week trial. “My assessment is that this was high-risk…

COURT STEPS OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ABUSE

COURT STEPS OUTSIDE THE FIXED COSTS REGIME: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ABUSE

October 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court (IPEC) guards its fixed costs regime very jealously. Prior to the decision in Link Up Mitaka Ltd (t/a Thebigword) v Language Empire Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 2728 there appears to have only been one previous…

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

October 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Adam Heppinstall for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser today in Bates -v- The Post Office [2018] EWHC 2968 (QB). This is a forceful judgment and what the judge had…

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VIII: PROPORTIONALITY LEADS TO BASE COSTS BEING REDUCED FROM £115,906.00 TO £75,000

PROPORTIONALITY: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE VIII: PROPORTIONALITY LEADS TO BASE COSTS BEING REDUCED FROM £115,906.00 TO £75,000

October 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality

I am grateful to my colleague Robin Dunne for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Auerbach in Reynolds -v- One Stop Limited (21st September 2018). A copy of the judgment is available A79YM916 Reynolds v One Stop…

COST LAWYERS - SHOW THEM SOME RESPECT: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

COST LAWYERS – SHOW THEM SOME RESPECT: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE HIGH COURT

October 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

There is a footnote to the judgment of Master Leonard yesterday in Allen v Brethertons LLP [2018] EWHC B15 (Costs) that is worth reading for anyone involved in costs litigation. “Ms Moore, when acting as a Costs Lawyer with a right…

THERE ARE GOOD REASONS NOT TO CALL AN OPPONENT'S 'RIDICULOUS' : PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE, IN FACT, CORRECT

THERE ARE GOOD REASONS NOT TO CALL AN OPPONENT’S ‘RIDICULOUS’ : PARTICULARLY IF THEY ARE, IN FACT, CORRECT

September 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Members Content, Written advocacy

This blog has looked at issues relating to written submissions many times. Included in this has been the need to avoid hyperbole, which often backfires.  A good example, borrowed from the United States, is the judgment in Bennett -v- Start…

EXPERTS ACTING ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS: A MAJOR PROBLEM AREA: DETAILED CONSIDERATION FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL

EXPERTS ACTING ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS: A MAJOR PROBLEM AREA: DETAILED CONSIDERATION FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL

September 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to  Graham Hain  for pointing out the decision of  the Upper Tribunal (Lands) Chamber in Gardiner & Theobald LLP v Jackson (VO) (RATING – procedure) [2018] UKUT 253 (LC). This specifically relates to experts in the Lands Chamber,…

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANTS IN GROUP LITIGATION ORDER:  INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE: AN EXHAUSTING READ

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANTS IN GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE: AN EXHAUSTING READ

September 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Fontaine in The VW NOx Emissions Group Litigation [2018] EWHC 2308 (QB) is a warning to any litigator thinking of applying for a Group Litigation Order (“GLO”).  The rule is clear basically – get your case in…

COSTS: PHONE HACKING AND REPUTATION: PROPORTIONALITY IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE SUMS AT STAKE

COSTS: PHONE HACKING AND REPUTATION: PROPORTIONALITY IS NOT JUST ABOUT THE SUMS AT STAKE

July 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Proportionality

In Various Claimants (In Wave 1 of the Mirror Newspapers Hacking Litigation) v MGN Ltd [2018] EWHC B13 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker addressed the elements of “proportionality”. “The rule does not prevent the recovery of costs in an amount greater than the…

SHAMEFUL LETTERS, LATE DISCONTINUANCE, INDEMNITY COSTS (AND A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE HARDLY COUNTS): THE CLAIMANT WHO LOST SIGHT OF "ANY BASIC STANDARD OF DECENT & COMPASSIONATE BEHAVIOUR"

SHAMEFUL LETTERS, LATE DISCONTINUANCE, INDEMNITY COSTS (AND A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE HARDLY COUNTS): THE CLAIMANT WHO LOST SIGHT OF “ANY BASIC STANDARD OF DECENT & COMPASSIONATE BEHAVIOUR”

July 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

Earlier posts have looked at the issue of aggressive correspondence. Others have looked at the issues of conduct, refusal to mediate and questions relating to indemnity costs. I am grateful to David Turner QC for drawing my attention to a…

CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE WITNESS EMAILED SOLICITORS AND COUNSEL  & SPOKE TO THIRD PARTIES WHILST IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE

CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE WITNESS EMAILED SOLICITORS AND COUNSEL & SPOKE TO THIRD PARTIES WHILST IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE

July 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Conduct, Members Content, Striking out

NB THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL IN Hughes Jarvis Ltd v Searle & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1 In Hughes Jarvis Limited v Searle [2018] EW Misc B6 (CC) Her Honour Judge Clarke struck out the claimant’s case…

COURTESY, CONDUCT AND LITIGATION: A ROUND UP OF THE POSTS

COURTESY, CONDUCT AND LITIGATION: A ROUND UP OF THE POSTS

July 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Useful links

Last week I set out the responses on Twitter about professional courtesy and conduct.  This is a good opportunity to recap on the four posts on this subject. “AGGRESSIVE CORRESPONDENCE” AND EFFECTIVE LITIGATION: ARE THE TWO SYNONYMOUS OR DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED…

CORONER ORDERED TO PAY COSTS: CAMDEN RESIDENTS WILL PICK UP THE BILL...

CORONER ORDERED TO PAY COSTS: CAMDEN RESIDENTS WILL PICK UP THE BILL…

June 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In Adath Yisroel Burial Society & Anor, R (on the application of) v HM Senior Coroner for Inner North London [2018] EWHC 1286 (Admin) the Divisional Court held that a coroner, who was unsuccessful in defending an application for judicial review,…

THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: LIABILITY FOR COSTS LAWYER'S ACTS: THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN GEMPRIDE -v- BAMRAH

THE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: LIABILITY FOR COSTS LAWYER’S ACTS: THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN GEMPRIDE -v- BAMRAH

June 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content

Yesterday I gave a short summary of the decision in Gempride Ltd v Bamrah & Anor [2018] EWCA Civ 1367. This is a case worth looking at in detail.   The substantive case settled for £50,000 shortly after issue. The question of…

5th BIRTHDAY REVIEW 2: WHAT THEY DON'T TEACH YOU AT LAW SCHOOL: 10 POSTS THAT STARTED ON A TRAIN STATION

5th BIRTHDAY REVIEW 2: WHAT THEY DON’T TEACH YOU AT LAW SCHOOL: 10 POSTS THAT STARTED ON A TRAIN STATION

June 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Advocacy, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am continuing looking back at series on this blog over the past five years. A series of posts in early 2017 was probably the most “collaborative” work on this blog.  Dozens of people participated in giving advice to law…

COURT OF APPEAL STATES THAT NO ORDER FOR COSTS IS THE APPROPRIATE ORDER: "THIS IS A MELANCHOLY TALE"

COURT OF APPEAL STATES THAT NO ORDER FOR COSTS IS THE APPROPRIATE ORDER: “THIS IS A MELANCHOLY TALE”

May 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

In  Sirketi v Kupeli & Ors [2018] EWCA Civ 1264 the Court of Appeal overturned an order for costs in favour of the claimants with an order for no costs. It was, as Lord Justice Hickinbottom observed “a melancholy tale”.  The…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND COST BUDGETS: "THEY WILL HAVE BECOME AN ARTIFICIAL CONSTRUCT OF THE LAWYERS"

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND COST BUDGETS: “THEY WILL HAVE BECOME AN ARTIFICIAL CONSTRUCT OF THE LAWYERS”

May 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Witness statements

There are some interesting observations in the judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Various Claimants v MGN Ltd [2018] EWHC 1244 (Ch).  The way in which a witness statement is likely to be drafted can be considered at the cost budget…

FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY TRIAL JUDGE: DEFENDANT'S APPEAL ALLOWED

FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY TRIAL JUDGE: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED

May 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

The previous post dealt with a judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer overturning a judgment in favour of the claimant. The judgment in Molodi v Cambridge Vibration Maintenance Service & Anor [2018] EWHC 1288 (QB)   is in similar terms.  Only on…

FAILING TO TAKE A PROPER PROOF OF EVIDENCE IS UNREASONABLE CONDUCT AND LEADS TO COSTS CONSEQUENCES FOR DEFENDANT - EVEN WHEN CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES

FAILING TO TAKE A PROPER PROOF OF EVIDENCE IS UNREASONABLE CONDUCT AND LEADS TO COSTS CONSEQUENCES FOR DEFENDANT – EVEN WHEN CLAIMANT DISCONTINUES

May 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment today in  Harrap v Brighton & Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust [2018] EWHC 1063 (QB) illustrates the importance of taking adequate witness statements.  It shows that a failure to review the situation and take a full proof of evidence…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY A DOZEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT: A RECAP

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY A DOZEN THINGS TO THINK ABOUT: A RECAP

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

← Previous 1 … 8 9 10 11 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXPERT WATCH 44: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EVIDENCE OF ONE EXPERT OVER ANOTHER: IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT…
  • SERVICE POINTS 34: IS SERVICE BY EMAIL IS STILL VALID – IF IT SITS IN THE RECIPIENT’S SPAM BOX?
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE, RECOLLECTION AND CREDIBILITY: AMY WINEHOUSE, HER FRIENDS AND THE ACCURACY OF RECOLLECTION
  • A TRIBUTE TO GILES PEAKER: “NEARLY LEGAL” – AN EXTRAORDINARY MAN WITH EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS
  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT

Top Posts

  • A TRIBUTE TO GILES PEAKER: "NEARLY LEGAL" - AN EXTRAORDINARY MAN WITH EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS
  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT'S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT
  • SERVICE POINTS 34: IS SERVICE BY EMAIL IS STILL VALID - IF IT SITS IN THE RECIPIENT'S SPAM BOX?
  • THERE MAY BE A LOT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING A PARTY: HOWEVER THE CLAIM WAS STILL PRESENTED IN AN "UNFOCUSED" MANNER: A "MOVEABLE FEAST" IS NOT A WISE WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

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.