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 26

DO FIXED COSTS APPLY TO PORTAL CASES ALLOCATED TO THE MULTI TRACK? A COUNTY COURT DECISION – THAT SAYS THAT THEY DO

October 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Quader -v- Esure Services Limited (Birmingham County Court 15th October 2015) His Honour Judge David Grant considered the issue of whether fixed costs applied to a portal case that was transferred to the Multi Track. THE CASE The judge…

SUING OR DEFENDING ON BEHALF OF AN ESTATE OR TRUST FUND: DID YOU KNOW YOUR COSTS BUDGETS MUST BE FILED WITH THE PLEADINGS?

October 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

A solicitor has pointed out to me the surprise provisions of Practice Direction 3F – on Costs Capping.  The title of  the Practice Directions is deceptive. There are also mandatory provisions in relation to the filing of costs budgets at…

REFUSAL TO REALLOCATE: DISTRICT JUDGES WILL NOT ACT AS THE "COURT OF APPEAL" IN ALLOCATION DECISIONS

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Williams -v- Santander UK PLC [2015] EW Misc B37(CC) District Judge Stamenkovich considered an application to re-allocate a case from the small claims track. “I can see no reason to sit as a Court of Appeal from my fellow…

IS THIS A PART 36 OFFER I SEE BEFORE ME? THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

The decision of Mr Justice Morgan in Tim-Alexander Gunther Nikolaus Hertel -v- Artemis International Sarl [2015] EWHC 2848 (Ch) involves a complex set of facts but is  extremely important in terms of construction of Part 36 offers. (It is perhaps…

WHEN DOES INTEREST BEGIN TO RUN ON COSTS? AN IMPORTANT DECISION

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Involnert Management Inc -v- Aprilgrange Limited [2015] EWHC 2834 (Comm) Mr Justice Legatt addressed the issues of when interest runs on costs. The problem arose because interest under the Judgments Act 1838 carries interest at 8%. Interest on costs…

LIQUIDATORS CLAIMED £1.1 MILLION IN COSTS: NO ORDER FOR COSTS MADE: NO ROBIN HOOD ORDER HERE

October 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Anton Smith of Ashton Bond Gigg Solicitors for sending me details of the decision of Mr Registrar Jones  In Brooks & Willetts (liquidators or Robin Hood Centre Plc) -v- Armstrong 2015 EWHC 2289 (Ch) a copy…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 1st OCTOBER 2015: MEET PRECEDENT Q

September 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes, Uncategorized

A reminder that there are new rules coming into force today, together with some changes to the Practice Directions. WHERE TO FIND THEM The civil procedure rules are here The amendments to the Practice Directions are here 81st Update PD Making…

RESPONDENT TO APPLICATION TO AMEND PLEADINGS ORDERED TO PAY COSTS BECAUSE THEY SHOULD HAVE CONSENTED

September 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Tobias Haynes from Regulatory Legal solicitors for sending me details of a judgment given today in relation to the costs of amendment. This is based on Tobias’ note of the judgment which was given today (30th…

CHILDREN AND SUCCESS FEES PART 2: WHAT SUCCESS FEE WAS REASONABLE?

September 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

We looked earlier at the decision of the Regional Cost Judge Lumb in the case of A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th August 2015). As a result of that case the decision of the success…

THE SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF COSTS: A PRIMER

September 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

 In the recent post on the case of  SRA -v-Imran we saw the problems posed because the respondent had failed to file a schedule of costs. Rather than order a detailed assessment the judge’s response was to order a “nominal”…

ADMINISTRATIVE COURT AWARDS NOTIONAL COSTS: THE PRICE TO PAY FOR THE ABSENCE OF A COSTS SCHEDULE

September 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is an interesting exchange at the end of the judgment of Mr Justice Dove in The Queen on the application of the Solicitors Regulation Authority -v- Imran [2015] EWHC 2572 (Admin). A REMINDER This is an example of the…

COSTS, CFAS, ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES AND GOING OUTSIDE PUBLIC FUNDING 2: SURREY -v- BARNET & CHASE

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

See the appeal on this case discussed here.  The previous post looked at the decision of Master Rowley in Hyde -v- Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B17 (Costs). In that case the Master decided that a decision to…

COSTS, CFAS, ADDITIONAL LIABILITIES AND GOING OUTSIDE PUBLIC FUNDING 1: HYDE -v- MILTON KEYNES

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

NB SEE THE APPEAL ON THESE ISSUES DISCUSSED HERE The decision of Master Rowley in Hyde -v- Milton Keynes Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B17 (Costs) has today become available on Bailli. It contains important observations in relation to…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

Relief from sanctions following late service of the notice of funding was granted by Mr Justice Simon in Jackson -v- Thompson Solicitors (& others) [2015] EWHC 549 (QB). THE CASE The claimant had failed in an action against multiple defendants…

HIGHER COURT FEES IN THE (NOT TOO DISTANT) FUTURE: THE GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION

August 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

The government response to the consultation process on court fees is now available. WHAT IT SAYS (“FOR THE MOST PART WE HAVE IGNORED EVERYONE AND THE INCREASES WILL GO AHEAD IN ANY EVENT”). “Following a consultation launched by the Coalition…

THE EFFECT OF QOCS ON LITIGATION: HERE'S THE THING: CASES WILL BE FOUGHT ON THEIR MERITS

August 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There has been much debate about the impact of QOCS on litigation. To date much of this has, inevitably, been speculative. However it is worthwhile reading George Riley’s article, Fundamental dishonesty and litigation in the post-Jackson landscape.  This shows, honestly…

MISCONDUCT ON ASSESSMENT LEADS TO REDUCTION OF COSTS BY 50%: KERINS -V- HEART OF ENGLAND NHS FOUNDATION TRUST

August 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There is a report on Lawtel today of the decision of District Judge Griffith in Kerins -v- Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust (Birmingham, 31st July 2015). The claimant’s costs were reduced by 50% because of misconduct in the assessment…

QOCS, STRIKING OUT AND THE LIABILITY TO PAY IN FULL: A COUNTY COURT DECISION

August 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, QOCS, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Colm Nugent of Hardwicke Chambers for sending me a copy of the judgment in Wall -v- British Canoe Union. A decision of HH Judge Lopez in Birmingham County Court on the 30th July 2015.  The judgment…

PROPORTIONALITY, ASSESSMENT AND THE COSTS OF BUDGETING: SENIOR COURTS COSTS OFFICE DECISION TODAY

August 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In BP -v- Cardiff & Vale University Local Health Board [2015] EWHC B13 (Costs) Master Gordon-Saker considered several issues relating to proportionality; the format of bills and the costs of costs budgeting. “Having conducted an assessment of the reasonableness of…

CHILDREN, SUCCESS FEES AND DEDUCTIONS FROM DAMAGES : AN IMPORTANT JUDGMENT

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content, Success Fees, Uncategorized

The question of child claimants and deductions from damages remains a live and controversial one. The judgment on this issue of the regional costs judge,District Judge Lumb in A & B -v- The Royal Mail Group  [2015] EW Misc B24(CC)(14th…

ORDERING SECURITY FOR COSTS, THIRD PARTY ACTIONS AND THE COSTS BUDGET

August 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

How important is an approved costs budget in determining the sum to be ordered by way of security for costs? This was an issue considered by Mr Justice Andrew Smith in Sarpd Oil International Ltd -v- Addax Energy [2015] EWHC…

NEW BILL OF COSTS CONSULTATION: A USEFUL LINK

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

A pilot scheme is being introduced for a new bill of costs model. Initially voluntary the scheme may become compulsory. THE DRAFT BILL AND GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS Useful guidance is available on the Hailsham Chambers website.  The draft bill and guidance…

COSTS: THE FACT YOU CAN'T PAY MAKES NO DIFFERENCE: AN IMPORTANT LESSON FOR LITIGANTS

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Bridge -v- Daley [2015] EWHC 2121 (Ch) Judge Hodge QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered submissions made in relation to a losing party paying costs. THE CASE The claimant sought permission to continue a derivative…

LITIGATION AS IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE: GOTCH -v- ENELCO

August 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Gotch -v- Enelco Ltd [2015] EWHC 1802 (TCC) Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart had strong words to say about the conduct of litigation and costs. KEY POINTS This is a case where five short passages from the judgment itself gives the…

ESSENTIAL READING: "FEES A CROWD WHEN JUSTICE AND POLITICS COLLIDE": A NLJ & LSLA PUBLICATION

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

There is a section on this  blog devoted to links to posts on procedure and costs. Occasionally, however, a post is so important that I feel compelled to draw attention to it. This definitely applies to the publication “Litigation Trends…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS AWARD OF INDEMNITY COSTS

August 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Arcadia Group Brands Ltd -v- Visa Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 883 the Court of Appeal, dismissed an appeal on the merits,  but nevertheless overturned the judge’s order for indemnity costs. THE CASE The claimants were bringing actions for breaches…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 3: THE COURT OF APPEAL AND ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the third case today about the issue of costs and the conduct of proceedings. It is the most  complex, Smith & Nephew plc -v- ConvaTec Technologies Inc [2015] EWCA Civ 803. THE CASE The Court of Appeal allowed…

COSTS AND CONDUCT 2: LOSER PAYS ALL APPLIES: MOORE IS NOT LESS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

In The London Borough of Tower Hamlets -v- The London Borough of Bromley [2015] EWHC 2271 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris refused an application for an issue based order and made an order for costs under the general rule that the…

COSTS & CONDUCT 1: MULTIPLE PARTIES, "BULLOCK" AND "SANDERSON" ORDERS AND INDEMNITY COSTS TO THE DEFENDANTS

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Uncategorized

There are several cases today where the courts have considered the issue of where costs should fall and how judicial discretion should be exercised.  The first we consider is Asghar -v- Ahmad [2015] EWHC 2234 (QB) a decision of Mr…

OUCH! THINKING OF DRAFTING A COSTS BUDGET? BEST READ THIS FIRST

July 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs budgeting, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in GSK Project Management Ltd -v- QPR Holdings Ltd [2015] EWHC 2274 (TCC) is one that needs to read by anyone involved in preparing a costs budget. To say the judge was critical of…

NEW RULES RELATING TO "NEUTRAL EVALUATION" ; LITIGANTS IN PERSON; ASSESSMENT; SPECIALIST FINANCIAL LIST (AND MORE…)

July 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

New rules have been introduced which (for the most part) come into force on the 1st October 2015.  Here we look at the key changes. THE RULES The Civil Procedure (Amendment No.4) Rules 2014 were laid before Parliament on the…

THE TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS OF QOCS: IMPORTANT AND INTERESTING DECISION: THE MEANING OF "PROCEEDINGS"

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

There is an interesting decision on checkmylegalfees.com website in relation to the transitional provisions of the QOCS regulations.  The full transcript of Casseldine -v- The Diocese of Llandaff Board for Social Responsibility (Regional Costs Judge Phillips, Cardiff County Court 15th…

CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS NOT SENT TO COVENTRY: KEY POINTS AND LINKS

July 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The decision in Coventry -v- Lawrence [2015] UKSC 50 has not led to any major change in practice and procedure (in relation to a costs regime that had already ended anyway). A link to the judgment is here  KEY POINTS…

JUSTICE COMMITTEE INQUIRY IN THE EFFECTS OF THE INCREASE IN COURT FEES: HOW TO RESPOND

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

The Justice Committee is holding an inquiry into the effects of the introduction and levels of the increased court fees. If anyone wants to send their responses to this blog, in addition to the inquiry, I will arrange a specific…

ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDER IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: A MATTER OF RISKS AND REWARDS

July 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In The Queen on the application of British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authorts -v- the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills [2015] EWHC 2401 (Admin) Mr Justice Green made an issue based costs order. THE CASE The…

SOLICITORS ARE ENTITLED TO ARGUE THEY SHOULD BE PAID AND ARE NOT LITIGANTS IN PERSON: A HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

July 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In EMW Law LLP -v- Halborg [2015] EWHC 2005 (Ch) His Honour Judge Purle QC considered some important elements in relation to the ability of solicitors to recover their costs. The judge also found that solicitors are not “litigants in person”…

RETROSPECTIVE CCFA WAS VALID (BUT ONLY JUST): CFAS "AWASH IN A SEA OF ILLEGALITY":THE NEED FOR COMPLIANCE

July 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

In Pentecost -v- John [2015] EWHC 1970 (QB) Turner J (sitting with Master Leonard as an assessor) held that a retrospective Collective Conditional Fee Agreement was valid between the client and their solicitors, thus valid for the purpose of enforcing…

MAKING A FINDING OF FRAUD WITHOUT EVIDENCE 3: THE COURTS ARE NOT EASILY AFFRONTED

July 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

For the third time in a fortnight the courts have sent out a clear message of the dangers of  judges making findings of fraud without having all the evidence to hand. THE CASE In Alpha Rocks Solicitors -v- Alade [2015]…

COSTS: INDEMNITY COSTS; IMMEDIATE ASSESSMENT OF COSTS; SET OFF & POTENTIAL INSOLVENCY: A HIGH COURT DECISION

July 3, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Rawlinson & Hunter Trustees SA -v- ITG [2015] EWHC 1924 (Ch) Mr Justice Morgan considered issues relating to indemnity costs and whether assessment of costs ordered on an interlocutory hearing should take place forthwith. KEY POINTS Although the conduct…

THE LIMITS OF ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: COMMERCIAL LITIGATION IS ABOUT MONEY (WHO KNEW?)

THE LIMITS OF ISSUE BASED COSTS ORDERS: COMMERCIAL LITIGATION IS ABOUT MONEY (WHO KNEW?)

June 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In The Northampton Regional Livestock Centre Company Ltd -v- Cowling [2015] EWCA Civ 651 the Court of Appeal made some important observations about costs, issue based orders and success, particularly in commercial cases. THE CASE The Court of Appeal were…

EVIDENCE, COSTS AND THE CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES: A CANADIAN VIEW

June 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has discussed  issues relating to the judicial approach of  the credibility  of witnesses many times.  Some judges have, shall we say, not been backward in giving their views on the “value” of the evidence of some of the…

PREVIOUS COSTS ORDERS STAND EVEN AFTER DISCONTINUANCE: A HIGH COURT DECISION

June 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Dar Al Arkan Real Estate Company -v- Al Refai [2015] EWHC 1793 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Smith considered whether discontinuance of an action should have an effect on previous costs orders. THE CASE The claimants had agreed terms of…

INCREASED COSTS AND "MYSTIFYING" PLEADINGS: A WARNING TO THOSE DRAFTING DEFENCES: IT'S GOING TO COST YOU

June 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Edis in Davies -v- Forrett [2015] EWHC 1761 QB is an object lesson on the dangers of lax pleading. Denying the relevance of a conviction in a pleading led to the joinder of a number…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND COSTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: NO DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR THE GOVERNMENT

June 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In The Queen (on the application of Bhatt) -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1724 (Admin) Helen Mountfield QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge) made some interesting observations in relation to the Denton principles, conduct…

TRUSTEE IN BANKRUPTCY NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS INCURRED BEFORE ADOPTION OF PROCEEDINGS: SUPREME COURT DECISION TODAY

June 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In a short judgment today in BPE Solicitors -v- Gabriel [2015] UKSC 39 the Supreme Court considered the question of whether a Trustee in Bankruptcy who adopts proceedings thereby becomes liable for the previous costs incurred in that action. THE…

COSTS, INDEMNITY COSTS AND CONDUCT WHEN CONSIDERING COSTS FOLLOWING AN ORDER FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION AT AN INTERLOCUTORY STAGE

June 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In JSC Mezhdumarodiniy Promyshlenniy Bank -v- Pugachev [2015] EWHC 1694 (Ch) Mr Justice Hildyard considered the issue of whether a respondent to an order for cross-examination should be ordered to pay the costs of that application and whether those costs…

HOW TO GET SUED, MAKE A LOSS AND BE MISERABLE (2015 EDITION): LEEDS 30th JUNE 2015

June 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs budgeting, Members Content

If you are a litigator and feeling happy, confident and have no concerns at all about getting things wrong, being sued or making a loss, then something may be missing from your life. TO MAKE YOUR LIFE COMPLETE Come to…

RECOVERY OF THE INSURANCE PREMIUM IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: 10 KEY POINTS

June 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content

The recent post on the decision in Nokes -v- Heart of England Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC B6 highlighted the issues relating to recoverability of the premium in clinical negligence cases.  Here is a 10 point summary: 1.  ONLY  THAT PART…

PERCENTAGE COSTS ORDERS AFTER A TRIAL: ISSUE BY ISSUE DEDUCTIONS

June 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Arnold in Novartis AG -v- Focus Pharmaceuticals Limited [2015] EWHC 1553 (Pat) is another example of an approach to percentage costs orders and interim orders for costs after a trial.  The judge ordered that the…

INVESTMENT BANK SPECIAL ADMINISTRATORS CANNOT USE CFAS: HIGH COURT DECISION

June 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content

Today appears to be a day for exceptions.  An earlier post dealt with the remaining provisions whereby litigants can recover insurance premiums this post deals with the limited circumstances in which administrators can litigate and recover additional liabilities. The question…

← Previous 1 … 25 26 27 … 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

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • 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
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • 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)
  • 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

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.