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 32

MORE MITCHELL MAYHEM: USE OF SQUARE BRACKETS LEADS TO COSTS BUDGET BEING DISALLOWED

December 30, 2013 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Striking out

A  report by Tom Gibson in PI Brief Update makes worrying reading. The headline reads ” Would a district judge strike out a costs budget because it contained the phrase “[Statement of truth]”, in square brackets, rather than the full…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND SERVING NOTICE OF FUNDING: A TALE OF TWO CASES

December 20, 2013 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

 Results of relief from sanctions applications are now being reported regularly. Here we look at two apparently contrasting applications in relation to relief from sanctions and the failure to give notice of funding. Both cases were reported today; both are…

SURVIVING MITCHELL A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE : 1 KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN MITCHELL AND HOW IT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED

December 10, 2013 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The decision in Mitchell is already having a major impact on day to day litigation. This is the first of a series of posts which looks at the Mitchell decision and deals with the practical steps that practitioner’s must take…

CAN MR MITCHELL STILL GET HIS COSTS? A PROFESSOR'S OPINION

December 4, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The comments section is at the bottom right hand side of this blog and a comment from Professor Hibbert made earlier this week may have been missed by many. I set it out below. No doubt this will give rise to…

UNDERSTANDING AND REDUCING THE COSTS OF LITIGATION: EDUCATING YOUR CLIENT

November 17, 2013 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Rule Changes

The previous post considered the case of Vitol Bahrain where the costs of the successful party on a one day application were reduced from £165,241.80 to £75,000. The amount of this shortfall highlights the need for the modern litigator to…

MITCHELL -v- NEWS GROUP NEWSPAPERS: OUTLINE OF CLAIMANT'S SUBMISSIONS

November 7, 2013 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There appeal in the Mitchell case was heard in the Court of Appeal case earlier today.  Judgment was reserved. I have a note of the arguments on behalf of the Claimant/Appellant.   The Defendant’s arguments will be posted later. I…

EXTENSIONS OF TIME WHEN THERE IS A MINOR BREACH: FULL TRANSCRIPT IN RAYYAN AL IRAQ CO LTD NOW AVAILABLE

October 30, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The case of Raayan Al Iraq Co. Ltd –v- Trans Victory Machine Inc [2013] EWHC 2696 (Comm) was mentioned in an earlier post. The full transcript is now available and provides useful reading for those applying for retrospective extensions of…

COSTS CONSEQUENCES OF PART 36 OFFERS: ANOTHER INTERESTING EXAMPLE

October 28, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Following the earlier post on Part 36 offers I am grateful to Marcus Davies from DWF for pointing me in the direction of the decision of Mrs Justice Andrews in Davison –v- Leitch [2013] EWHC 3092 (QB). This provides another…

THE COSTS CONSEQUENCES OF PART 36 OFFERS: DO THEY ALWAYS APPLY? THE CASES IN DETAIL

October 27, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

The costs consequences when a claimant fails to beat a Part 36 from the defendant are well known and long established.   The advantages for a claimant who now beats their own offer were examined in a previous post.  Here we…

HOW RELEVANT ARE PART 36 OFFERS TO ISSUE BASED ORDERS? A SALUTARY WARNING ABOUT THE RISKS OF LITIGATION

October 1, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

The making of an “issue based” costs order is now a common aspect of litigation.  However how relevant is a Part 36 offer when a court is considering making an “issue based” costs order?  A recent case contains discussion of…

THANKS FOR THE £500,000. NOW WHERE’S THE EXTRA £50,000 YOU OWE ME?  KNOWING THE RISKS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE CLAIMANT IN THE NEW PART 36

THANKS FOR THE £500,000. NOW WHERE’S THE EXTRA £50,000 YOU OWE ME? KNOWING THE RISKS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE CLAIMANT IN THE NEW PART 36

June 27, 2013 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36

The new provisions when a claimant beats their own Part 36 provide challenges (including potential negligence claims) for the claimant lawyer.  A claimant who beats their own Part 36 offer at trial now obtains considerable benefit.  CPR 36.13(3) states that…

← Previous 1 … 31 32

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

  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 7: SECOND ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE A FOREIGN JUDGMENT WAS (AMONG OTHER THINGS) AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
  • LITIGATOR’S LIFELINES 3: WHAT IF YOU HAVE SERVED A SCHEDULE OF COSTS LATE?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “SKELETON ARGUMENTS – DO THEM PROPERLY OR YOU WON’T GET PAID” (NOVEMBER 2014)
  • COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE
  • YOU CAN’T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN’T ATTEND – BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS …

Top Posts

FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
WRITING LETTERS TO THE JUDGE AFTER A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS CIRCULATED: "THIS IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE CONDUCT OF SOLICITORS CONDUCTING LITIGATION AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET"
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
YOU CAN'T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN'T ATTEND - BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS ...
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT

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.