Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Counterclaim
COVID REPEATS 31: REPLIES AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: A PRIMER

COVID REPEATS 31: REPLIES AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: A PRIMER

May 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Surprisingly this post about the basics of replies and counterclaims  was the second most read post on this blog in 2017 (surprising because it was written in July 2016).  It simply sets out the basic rules relating to filing a…

THE ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE: DECLARATIONS FOR THE DEFENDANT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE

THE ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE: DECLARATIONS FOR THE DEFENDANT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE

February 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Master Thornett in  Day v Bryant (declaratory relief – costs – QOCS) [2018] EWHC 158 (QB) is an example of a rare case where a defendant, in a personal injury case, obtained a declaration on a counterclaim. It…

SOME FEEDBACK - WHEN DEFENCE TURNS TO COUNTERCLAIM

SOME FEEDBACK – WHEN DEFENCE TURNS TO COUNTERCLAIM

November 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Applications, Litigants in person, Members Content

Feedback from readers is rare.  I received a letter today which the author has given be permission to reproduce.   Just a quick note of thanks. I’m an LIP, having been involved in litigation as defendant for the last 3…

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE AFTER REDBOURN: 10 KEY POINTS FOR DEFENDANTS (CLAIMANTS MUST READ TOO)

SETTING JUDGMENT ASIDE AFTER REDBOURN: 10 KEY POINTS FOR DEFENDANTS (CLAIMANTS MUST READ TOO)

June 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Default judgment,, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

The judgment in Redbourn Group Ltd -v- Fairgate Development Limited [2017] EWHC 1223 (TCC) highlights the fact that there is a new age for a party seeking to set judgment aside. Not only does the party have to satisfy the requirements of…

CLAIMANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF PART 36 OFFER DOES NOT LEAD TO JUDGMENT ON COUNTERCLAIM: A MARATHON EFFORT BUT TO NO AVAIL

December 11, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Part 36, Uncategorized

In Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2016] EWHC 2615 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt rejected an argument that the claimant’s  acceptance of a Part 36 offer meant that a defendant was entitled to judgment on its counterclaim. KEY POINTS The…

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.