Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » CPR 3.10
FIRST CLAIM FORM CASE OF THE YEAR: SERVICE WITHOUT A SEAL IS NOT GOOD SERVICE BUT CPR 3.10 SAVED THE CLAIMANT

FIRST CLAIM FORM CASE OF THE YEAR: SERVICE WITHOUT A SEAL IS NOT GOOD SERVICE BUT CPR 3.10 SAVED THE CLAIMANT

February 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

It took until the 31st January for the first claim form of the case of the year to come up (a bit later than normal, still there’s 11 months left). This time it was good news for the claimant.  In…

PROCEDURAL DEFECTS AND CPR 3.10: CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT

PROCEDURAL DEFECTS AND CPR 3.10: CONSIDERATION BY THE COURT

March 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Sanctions

The judgment in Baxendale-Walker v APL Management Ltd [2018] EWHC 543 (Ch) covers several issues relating to procedure. Here I want to look at the assertions made in relation to procedural defects.  The judge held that some procedural errors by the…

WITHDRAWAL OF PART 36 OFFER BY EMAIL: CPR 3.10 SAVES THE CLAIMANT

WITHDRAWAL OF PART 36 OFFER BY EMAIL: CPR 3.10 SAVES THE CLAIMANT

March 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Part 36

The change in the discount rate meant that many claimants withdraw Part 36 offers they had made.  This has led to the question – is an email withdrawing an offer sufficient.  I am grateful to Dominic Graham  from Holmes &…

CPR 3.10 STOPS A CLAIM FROM SINKING: USING THE WRONG FORM NOT FATAL TO AN ACTION

October 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In LD Commodities Rice Merchandising LLC -v- The Owners and/or Charterers of the Vessel Styliani Z [2015 ] EWHC 3060 (Admlty) Mr Justice Teare considered a case where the claimant used the wrong form to issue an action, this could…

COULD CPR 3.10 BE THE LITIGATORS NEW BEST FRIEND? THE IMPLICATIONS OF INTEGRAL PETROLEUM CONSIDERED (AND THEY ARE ENORMOUS)

March 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

In Integral Petroleum SA -v- SCU Finanz AG [2014] EWHC 702 (Comm) Popplewell held that the provisions of CPR 3.10 meant that  service of the particulars of claim by e-mail could be good service and the default judgment entered thereafter…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2021. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 23,282 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • BUNDLES AGAIN: JUDGES WASTING THEIR BREATH: “HOW MANY YEARS – DECADES – HAVE TO PASS BEFORE THOSE WHO KNOW BETTER AND WHO… ARE BEING HANDSOMELY RENUMERATED COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS?”
  • APPLYING TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET: RULES AND PROCEDURE: WEBINAR 19th MAY 2021
  • SIR HARRY OGNALL: A TRIBUTE: SOMEONE PROUD TO BE DESCRIBED AS A “GORILLA FROM THE NORTH”
  • COURT GRANTS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “IT IS UNFAIR… TO BE CRITICAL OF A PARTY FOR FAILING TO MEET A DEADLINE THAT WAS ALREADY UNLIKELY TO BE ANYWAY, WHATEVER STEPS HAD BEEN TAKEN TO COMPLY WITH IT”
  • THE DANGERS OF LEAVING SERVICE OF EVIDENCE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE: DEFENDANT MISCALCULATED TIME WITNESS STATEMENTS DUE – REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

Top Posts & Pages

  • THE DANGERS OF LEAVING SERVICE OF EVIDENCE UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE: DEFENDANT MISCALCULATED TIME WITNESS STATEMENTS DUE - REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS
  • BUNDLES AGAIN: JUDGES WASTING THEIR BREATH: "HOW MANY YEARS - DECADES - HAVE TO PASS BEFORE THOSE WHO KNOW BETTER AND WHO... ARE BEING HANDSOMELY RENUMERATED COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS?"
  • COURT GRANTS RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "IT IS UNFAIR... TO BE CRITICAL OF A PARTY FOR FAILING TO MEET A DEADLINE THAT WAS ALREADY UNLIKELY TO BE ANYWAY, WHATEVER STEPS HAD BEEN TAKEN TO COMPLY WITH IT"
  • SIR HARRY OGNALL: A TRIBUTE: SOMEONE PROUD TO BE DESCRIBED AS A "GORILLA FROM THE NORTH"
  • APPLICATIONS TO VARY A COSTS BUDGET: SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS, PROMPTNESS AND CPR 3.15A: A JUDGMENT THAT EVERY CIVIL LITIGATOR HAS TO READ

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin