Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » costs » Page 25

£50,000 COSTS INCURRED: £500,000 ALLOWED: HOW DID THAT HAPPEN?

April 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Justice Spencer in Bolt Burdon Solicitors -v- Tariq [2016] EWHC 811 (QB) is an interesting consideration of non contentious business agreements.” The judge found that an agreement which meant that the solicitors recovered 50% of the damages…

COSTS SHOULD NOT NORMALLY BE REDUCED WHEN A CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

April 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

|n Webb -v-Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2016]EWCA Civ 365 the Court of Appeal overturned an “issue based” decision on costs in a case where a claimant had beaten there own Part 36 offer. “It is a sad fact that…

DOES COSTS BUDGETING APPLY TO A FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM WHERE A CHILD IS A DEPENDANT? SOME MORE DETAIL

April 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

Over the weekend I heard two speakers on costs budgeting mention my view that costs budgeting may not now apply to fatal accident claims where children are dependants.  Given the potential significance of this, it is worth expanding my concerns….

NEW RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS TOMORROW: THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS

April 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

Following the post about the rule changes coming into force tomorrow there was some discussion about the transitional provisions. The confusion comes about partly because the SI introducing them says the same thing in different ways.  However further confusion arises…

RULE CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE: 48 HOURS TO GO

April 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

A short, but timely, reminder that new rules come into force on the 6th April 2016. These include: No costs budgeting where the claim is brought on behalf of a child. Normally no costs budgeting when the claimant has limited…

COSTS OF IN-HOUSE SOLICITORS: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH

March 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Sidewalk Properties Ltd -v- Twinn [2015] UKUT 0122 (LC) the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) considered the issue of the appropriate rates to be charged by an in-house solicitor and the appropriate basis for an inter-partes award. KEY POINTS The…

APPEAL COSTS ARE PAYABLE IMMEDIATELY: HIGH COURT DECISION

March 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Khaira -v- Shergill [2016] EWHC 628 (Ch) Richard Spearman QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge) held that costs ordered by the Supreme Court were payable forthwith and an assessment should not be stayed until the end of the case….

THE PROTOCOLS: OFFERS AND RAISING NEW POINTS AT THE HEARING

March 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Admissions, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

The 4 New Square website has a copy of an interesting judgment of His Honour Judge Freedman in Mulholland -v- Hughes (18th September 2015). “I regard it as inequitable and unfair for a defendant, for the first time, to raise…

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

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

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

NEW COURT FEES (INCREASED NEEDLESS TO SAY)

March 22, 2016 · by gexall · in Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

Court fees increased yesterday. There has been much public discussion of the family fees. Very little about the increase in fees for applications. LINKS TO THE RULES The statutory instrument is available here The facile “Impact Assessment” is available here….

COSTS BUDGETING: PROPORTIONALITY; CITY FIRMS & COUNSEL WHEN THERE IS £16 MILLION AT STAKE

March 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Morgan in Group Seven Limited -v- Nasir [2016] EWHC 629 (Ch) provides some interesting observations in relation to costs budgeting.  It demonstrates that issues of proportionality are important even in a case where £16…

COSTS, FIXED COSTS AND COSTS BUDGETING WHEN MAKING AN INTERIM ORDER: ALL IN THE PINK

March 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Costs budgeting, Interim Payments, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Justice Birss in Thomas Pink Ltd -v-Victoria’s Secret UK Limited [2014] EWHC 3258 has only recently been posted on Bailii.  However it contains an interesting example of the court considering the issue of costs, fixed costs…

MOVING FROM PUBLIC FUNDING TO CFA: NOT A REASONABLE STEP IN THIS CASE

March 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB see the appeals related to these issues discussed here This blog has already reviewed several of the cases where the courts have considered the reasonableness of moving from public funding to a conditional fee agreement.  The issue is significant…

AN ATTEMPT TO LIMIT COSTS MAKES A CALDERBANK OFFER INEFFECTIVE

March 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Burrell -v- Clifford [2016] EWHC 578 (Ch) Mr R Spearman QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) decided that an offer which was equivalent to the sum awarded in damages was not effective because the defendant also…

PART 36: THE COSTS CONSEQUENCES OF LATE ACCEPTANCE

March 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The case of ABC -v- Barts Health NHS Trust [2016] EWHC 500 (QB) decided earlier today provides an object lesson on the dangers of Part 36. His Honour Judge McKenna considered whether he should depart from the “usual rules” in…

SWITCHING FROM PUBLIC FUNDING TO A CFA: ANOTHER CASE

March 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB See the appeal on this case discussed here This blog has followed those cases where judges have decided whether it was reasonable for claimants to switch from legal aid to public funding. Perhaps more to the point, the issue…

LEGAL AID IN CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

March 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In an earlier post I  set out the judgment of the Court of Appeal in Brown -v- London Borough of Haringey [2015] EWCA Civ 483 about the availability of legal aid in committal proceedings. This included the passage ” The question…

DENTON DOES NOT APPLY TO DELAY IN PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT

March 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Simon Anderson of Park Square Barristers for his note of the judgment of Deputy District Judge Hill yesterday (4th March 2016) in the case of Martin -v- The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. This decision is…

SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES, WASTED COSTS AND THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH

March 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Uncategorized, Wasted Costs, Witness statements

It is important that the report of the decision in Brown -v- Haven by Flint Bishop in their post on wasted costs order is given wide publicity.  The judgment of Deputy District Judge Lingard is available here. (This is one…

CHANGES TO COST BUDGETING RULES: KEY DATES AND TIMES

March 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

The previous post looked at the changes to costs budgeting coming into force on the 6th April.   Here is a list of the key dates and times. These are key dates in litigation and the sanction for failing to…

IMPORTANT CHANGES TO COSTS BUDGETING: THE KEY POINTS

March 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

New rules in relation to costs budgeting come into force on the 6th April 2016. They apply to proceedings commenced on or after 6th April 2016. EXEMPTION FOR CHILDREN  5. In rule 3.12(1), for subparagraph (c), substitute— “(c) where in…

THE SOLICITOR, THE LIQUIDATOR AND THE CFA: STEVENSDRAKE THE JUDGMENT AT TRIAL

February 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Success Fees, Uncategorized

In Stevensdrake -v- Hunt [2016] EWHC 342 (Ch) His Honour Judge Simon Barker QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) decided that, despite the clear wording of a conditional fee agreement,  the defendant was not personally liable to…

PROBATE FEES,COSTS AND FATAL ACCIDENTS: SIX KEY POINTS

February 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Court fees, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Uncategorized

There has been major controversy recently about the proposed increase in probate fees. In particular there was some concern, expressed on twitter, that claimants could not afford to issue proceedings.  There are a number of points that need to be…

FIXED COSTS AND PART 36: THE JUDGMENT IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal has given judgment today in Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94. “Where a claimant makes a successful Part 36 offer in a section IIIA case, he will be awarded fixed costs to the last staging…

COSTS, COPYING AND PROPORTIONALITY

February 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,, Uncategorized

The judgment of His Honour Judge Lochrane in Ryanair Limited -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWFC B5 has attracted some attention. Here I want to look at the short judgment in relation to costs. THE CASE…

LORD CHANCELLOR GETS A BONUS: THE POWERFUL RESULTS OF A CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER

February 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

There are many interesting issues in the judgment of Mr Justice Holgate in The Lord Chancellor -v- Charles Ete & Co [2016] EWHC 275 (QB) which may be interesting to examine at a later date. However one significant point was…

DISCLOSURE AND PREDICTIVE CODING: PYHRRO EXPLAINED FOR THE TYRO

February 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Proportionality, Uncategorized

There has been much written already in relation to the decision of Master Matthews in Pyrrho Investments Ltd -v- MWB Property Ltd [2016] EWHC 256 (Ch) [see the links below]. However I want to concentrate upon the fact that this…

CIVIL JUSTICE: COMING TO A CALL CENTRE NEAR YOU – SOON

February 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Members Content, Uncategorized

So 86 courts are to close. The Written Ministerial Statement asserts that “over 97% of citizens will be able to reach their required court within an hour by car”.  Putting aside the fact that 22% of women and 17% of…

WHY THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COURT FEES INCREASE SHOULD HANG THEIR HEADS IN SHAME

February 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

If evidence were needed of the profound impact of the increase in court fees in can be found in newspaper articles over the past few days. IT IS JUST ONE CASE The Guardian reported on one case of a social…

MOVING FROM LEGAL AID TO CFAS: THE JUDGMENTS

February 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB see the appeals relating to these cases discussed here The cases surrounding the switch from legal aid to a CFA were reviewed  in my post earlier this week . The full transcripts are now available (I am grateful to Aaron Vodden…

MOVING FROM LEGAL AID TO CFAS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

February 9, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

NB see the appeals in relation to these issues discussed here . There have been recent developments in relation to the issue of the reasonableness of claimant solicitors moving from legal aid to conditional fee agreements. The first case upholds a…

THE MEANING OF THE WORD "CLAIM": A PSYCHOLOGICAL PHENOMENON

February 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Global Flood Defence Systems -v- Johan Den Noort Beheer BV [2016] EWHC 189 (IPEC) His Honour Judge Hacon was considering an issue very specific to the Intellecutal Property Enterprise Court. However the observations are interesting and may be of…

NOT A RACING CERTAINTY BUT INDEMNITY COSTS FOLLOW CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER

February 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Jockey Club Racehorse Ltd -v- Willmott Dixon Construction Limited [2016] EWHC 167 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart held that a claimant’s Part 36 offer to settle for 95% was a relevant offer and had costs consequences for the defendant. KEY…

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

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

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

COSTS,INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS: (OR "COPPERS COP IT")

January 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Contribution proceedings, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Mohidin -v-Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2016] EWHC 105 (QB) Mr Justice Gilbart carried out an extensive review of the principles relating to contribution proceedings and costs. KEY POINTS Two police officers who had been involved in the…

COURT FEES: LINKS FOR TODAY

January 26, 2016 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Uncategorized

The links section is an integral part of this blog. For today, however, I wanted to take those links on the issue of court fees and put them in a post of their own.  That is the responses today to…

KERRY UNDERWOOD ON QOCS: A REVIEW

KERRY UNDERWOOD ON QOCS: A REVIEW

January 24, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

A review of QOCS, Section 57 and Set off. Kerry Underwood. £25.00. Available online here Qualified one way costs shifting is here to stay.  It may be extended to other areas.  A detailed knowledge of the rules and regulations is…

COSTS AFTER A SPLIT TRIAL: PART 36; UNNECESSARY EXPERT REPORTS; PROPORTIONALITY AND USELESS BUNDLES: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The short judgment of Mr Justice Males in C&S  Associates UK Limited -v- Enterprise Insurance Company PLC [2016] EWHC 67 (Comm) encapsulates many of the problems of contemporary litigation. “It is important that those litigating in this court are aware…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: NO PERMISSION TO SERVE RESPONDENT'S NOTICE LATE

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Pipe -v- Spicerhaart Estate Agents Ltd [2016] EWHC 61 QB Mr Justice Sweeney refused permission to serve a Respondent’s notice late. “Against the background that this is a small claims case, the conduct of the Respondent in relation to…

ANOTHER CASE OF INDEMNITY COSTS BECAUSE OF A REFUSAL TO MEDIATE

January 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Uncategorized

The decision on Master Simons in Bristow  -v- The Princess Alexander Hospital NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B22 (Costs) contains examples of two mistakes that can be made on assessment of costs. The most telling is the defendant’s failure to respond…

PART 36, THE COMPENSATION RECOVERY UNIT AND COSTS: A SIGNIFICANT COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Crooks -v- Hendricks Lovell Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 8 the Court of Appeal considered some significant issues in relation to the interrelationship between Part 36 and the CRU situation in personal injury cases. KEY POINTS A claimant who recovered…

FIXED COSTS, PART 36 AND THE PROTOCOL: A DIFFERENT OUTCOME

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

NB this decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal. Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94. The post earlier today on fixed costs after Part 36 offers led Benjamin Williams QC to, kindly, send me a decision of Smith -v-…

FIXED COSTS AND CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFERS

January 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Damages, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

This case must be read with the Court of decision in Broadhurst -v- Tan [2016] EWCA Civ 94.  This effectively overrides this decision. Fixed costs do not apply when indemnity costs are ordered.  There is a report, helpfully put online by…

PART 36: WHEN THE NORMAL COSTS PENALTIES MAY NOT APPLY

December 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Yentob -v-MGN Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 1292 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision of the judge not to impose the normal penalties when a claimant failed to beat a Part 36 offer. KEY POINTS When a party fails…

CHILDREN AND SUCCESS FEES 3: APPEAL WITHDRAWN

December 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized

Earlier posts looked at the decision of Regional Cost Judge Lumb in A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th August 2015). The second judgment on costs is now available on Bailli. These posts deal with deduction of…

NO SPECIAL RULES FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: COSTS DO NOT FOLLOW THE EVENT FOLLOWING UNREASONABLE CONDUCT

December 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Litigants in person, Members Content, Uncategorized

Master Mathews faced an unusual scenario in Jones -v- Longley [2015] EWHC 3362 (Ch).  This case highlights the fact that litigants in person are not subject to any special rules and are liable to have orders for costs made against…

ASSESSMENT OF COSTS & FAILURE TO MEDIATE: CLAIMANT BEATS OWN OFFER AND COSTS INCREASED BY 10%

December 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The claimant beat its own Part 36 offer on costs in the case of Reid -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust [2015] EWHC B21. Consequently costs were increased by 10% and additional interest accrued. “If the party unwilling to mediate is…

COSTS BUDGETING, PROPORTIONALITY AND GROUP LITIGATION

December 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Group Litigation Orders, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine & others [2015] EWHC 3543 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone (sitting with Master Leslie & Chief Master Gordon Saker) considered costs budgeting within a Group Litigation Order. “Recognising that this is a complex case…

CLAIMANT CAN RECOVER COSTS AGAINST A DEFENDANT NOT NAMED IN THE CFA

December 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Engeham -v- London & Quadrant Housing Ltd & Academy of Plumbing Ltd (01/12/2015) * the Court of Appeal upheld a finding that a consent order which stated that damages and costs were to be paid by a defendant not named…

IS THIS A CLAIMANT'S OR DEFENDANT'S OFFER? ANOTHER IMPORTANT HIGH COURT DECISION ON PART 36

November 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Bundles, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Van Orrd Uk Limited -v- Allseas UK Limited [2015] EWHC 3385 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson considered the appropriate consequences when the defendant had beaten its own Part 36 offer. These were unusual circumstances in that the  court had to…

← Previous 1 … 24 25 26 … 30 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

  • 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”
  • THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS A JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION IN FAVOUR OF A SOLICITOR: THE OMBUDSMAN GOT NOTHING WRONG (QUITE A LOT HERE ABOUT VULNERABLE CLIENTS AS WELL…)
  • DEEPFAKES AND THE LAWYER: SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS AND LINKS: “VERIFICATION SHOULD OCCUR BEFORE EVIDENCE IS DEPLOYED, NOT AFTER AUTHENTICITY IS CHALLENGED…”
  • “DEEPFAKE” EVIDENCE POSSIBLY COMING TO A COURT NEAR YOU SOON: LESSONS FROM AMERICA…

Top Posts

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...)
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
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
PROVING THINGS 291: WHAT WEIGHT DOES A JUDGE GIVE TO WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL AND (THE JUDGE FINDS) THERE IS NO GOOD REASON FOR THIS?

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.