Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Evidence » Page 3
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2025

AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2025

May 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Professional negligence,

“We go back through your claim in fine detail and if we find that your previous solicitor wasn’t thorough enough and your claim was mishandled, we’ll squeeze out all the compensation that you’re entitled to, getting you more money, and…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 4: THE EMPLOYER WAS IN BREACH OF DUTY WHEN EMPLOYEE WAS INJURED CROSSING THE ROAD

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 4: THE EMPLOYER WAS IN BREACH OF DUTY WHEN EMPLOYEE WAS INJURED CROSSING THE ROAD

May 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

Last week we looked at a  case where someone was injured in their workplace, but there was no breach.  Today we are looking a case where an employee was injured crossing the road and it was held that the employer…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 101: HOW NOT TO WRITE A LEGAL LETTER : DIMISSING CRUCIAL POINTS AS "COSMETIC" ERRORS LEADS TO REFERRAL TO THE SRA

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 101: HOW NOT TO WRITE A LEGAL LETTER : DIMISSING CRUCIAL POINTS AS “COSMETIC” ERRORS LEADS TO REFERRAL TO THE SRA

May 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There has not been a post in this series for some time.    There was one case last week that made me decide to restart the series. It is not difficult to guess which case caused me concern.     …

THE COURT DOES NOT REQUIRE EXPERT EVIDENCE TO CONSTRUE A TERM IN AN AGREEMENT: AN EXPERT CANNOT BE USED TO USURP THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT

THE COURT DOES NOT REQUIRE EXPERT EVIDENCE TO CONSTRUE A TERM IN AN AGREEMENT: AN EXPERT CANNOT BE USED TO USURP THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT

May 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Case Management, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Is an expert needed to construe a contractual agreement.  Here we have a case where the Master was very much against the applicant who sought permission to rely on an expert.   An expert was not needed to report on market…

EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE RISKS OF "ANCHORING": THE EXPERT "GAVE THE SENSE OF TRYING TO ARGUE THE CLAIMANT'S CASE"

EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE RISKS OF “ANCHORING”: THE EXPERT “GAVE THE SENSE OF TRYING TO ARGUE THE CLAIMANT’S CASE”

May 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Today we are looking at a case where the judge had considerable reservations about expert evidence called on behalf of a claimant.  Not all the problems that occurred were the fault of the expert.  However she was the third expert…

THE ROLE OF LEADING COUNSEL IN RELATION TO EXPERT REPORTS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: A CLIENT CAN PAY FOR WHAT THEY WANT, BUT THESE COSTS WILL NOT BE RECOVERABLE INTER PARTES

THE ROLE OF LEADING COUNSEL IN RELATION TO EXPERT REPORTS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: A CLIENT CAN PAY FOR WHAT THEY WANT, BUT THESE COSTS WILL NOT BE RECOVERABLE INTER PARTES

May 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content

How far should leading counsel, or counsel generally, be involved in the preparation of expert reports and witness statements?   One obvious reply is “not at all”, given that the evidence should come from the expert or witness.  These issues were…

NEW EDITION OF THE KINGS BENCH GUIDE: THE GENERAL CHANGES AND THE GUIDANCE ON ANONYMITY ORDERS

NEW EDITION OF THE KINGS BENCH GUIDE: THE GENERAL CHANGES AND THE GUIDANCE ON ANONYMITY ORDERS

May 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a new edition of the King’s Bench Guide.  There are some additions and changes.  In particular the Guide notes the difference between an application for an anonymity order made at an approval hearing and one that is not….

THE RICS PRACTICE ALERT  ON ACTING AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR AND OTHER HIGH VOLUME CASES: OF INTEREST TO ALL EXPERTS (AND THOSE WHO INSTRUCT THEM)

THE RICS PRACTICE ALERT ON ACTING AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR AND OTHER HIGH VOLUME CASES: OF INTEREST TO ALL EXPERTS (AND THOSE WHO INSTRUCT THEM)

May 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

The RICS has produced a Practice Alert aimed specifically at those acting as expert witnesses in housing disrepair and other high volume cases.  It some ways the Alert is surprising in that it says nothing new, that is most of…

DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND THE DEFENDANT'S ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2025

DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND THE DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2025

April 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Much of the task of the claimant lawyer concentrates on the task of building up the claim for damages to ensure proper compensation. However it is essential that the lawyer if fully aware of the arguments, case law and principles…

£1 MILLION CASE AUTOMATICALLY STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A "ROGUE SOLICITOR" WAS NOT A STRONG ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF REINSTATEMENT

£1 MILLION CASE AUTOMATICALLY STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A “ROGUE SOLICITOR” WAS NOT A STRONG ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF REINSTATEMENT

April 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of HHJ Hassall in  Mr Martyn Ian Haynes v Total Plant Hire Limited is available as a link on an article in the Law Society Gazette, available here.  The case involves a detailed consideration of the Denton criteria. In particular some of the arguments on…

RECENT CASES ON LOSS OF EARNINGS: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 23rd APRIL 2025

RECENT CASES ON LOSS OF EARNINGS: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 23rd APRIL 2025

April 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Practitioners can learn a lot from looking at judgments on claims for loss of earnings.  These provide a practical grounding of how the courts approach such claims and, in particular, how judges consider the evidence (or absence of evidence) in…

EXPERT REPORTS AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED IN THE COURTS AGAIN: LEADS TO A DOCTOR BEING ERASED FROM THE REGISTER OF DOCTORS

EXPERT REPORTS AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED IN THE COURTS AGAIN: LEADS TO A DOCTOR BEING ERASED FROM THE REGISTER OF DOCTORS

April 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment in Moodliar v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 913 (Admin) provides a salutary reminder to medical experts that giving expert evidence is a highly significant task.  Failures in the process can lead to erasure from the medical register,…

PROVING THINGS 260: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT ON ADVERSE INFERENCES: "WE REJECT THIS NEW WAY OF PUTTING THE ADVERSE INFERENCE CASE"

PROVING THINGS 260: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT ON ADVERSE INFERENCES: “WE REJECT THIS NEW WAY OF PUTTING THE ADVERSE INFERENCE CASE”

April 16, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to David Platt KC for drawing my attention to the Court of Appeal decision in Alexander Johnstone v Fawcett’s Garage (Newbury) Limited [2025] EWCA Civ 467, in particular to the judgment in relation to adverse inferences.  The Court of…

THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE OVERRIDDEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE (UNCHALLENGED) EXPERT WITNESS: CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY

THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE OVERRIDDEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE (UNCHALLENGED) EXPERT WITNESS: CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY

April 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Sarah Jane Young v John Anthony Downey [2025] EWCA Civ 177 the Court of Appeal sent out another reminder that there are difficulties in trial judges attempting to override the views of expert witnesses.       “… in the circumstances…

EXPERT EVIDENCE FOR HOUSING LAWYERS: WEBINAR 14th MAY 2025

EXPERT EVIDENCE FOR HOUSING LAWYERS: WEBINAR 14th MAY 2025

April 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

I am giving a webinar for  the Steve Cornforth Consultance on the 14th May 2025.  It is aimed at housing lawyers and aims to have a comprehensive look at the rules, guidance and cases on the use of experts in…

APPLICATION TO ADDUCE "EXPERT EVIDENCE" FROM THE CLAIMANT'S SON WAS REFUSED: THIS IS NOT AN EXPERT REPORT, IT IS NOT COMPLIANT, NOT IMPARTIAL AND NOT ADMISSIBLE...

APPLICATION TO ADDUCE “EXPERT EVIDENCE” FROM THE CLAIMANT’S SON WAS REFUSED: THIS IS NOT AN EXPERT REPORT, IT IS NOT COMPLIANT, NOT IMPARTIAL AND NOT ADMISSIBLE…

April 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

We are returning to the judgment of Jason Beer KC Rajan Marwaha v Director of Border Revenue & Anor [2025] EWHC 869 (KB) Jason Beer KC and staying with the issue of “expert” evidence. This time looking at the attempt of…

PROVING THINGS 259: WHEN THE COURT REFUSES PERMISSION FOR THE EXPERTS TO GIVE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THESE ARE BASICALLY ISSUES OF FACT

PROVING THINGS 259: WHEN THE COURT REFUSES PERMISSION FOR THE EXPERTS TO GIVE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THESE ARE BASICALLY ISSUES OF FACT

April 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Rajan Marwaha v Director of Border Revenue & Anor [2025] EWHC 869 (KB) Jason Beer KC dismissed the claimant’s application that forensic accountants give evidence at trial.  The experts had basically agreed that there were issues of fact to…

SPORTING INJURIES IN THE COURTS: WEBINAR 17TH APRIL 2025: SOME INTERESTING TOPICS TO TACKLE...

SPORTING INJURIES IN THE COURTS: WEBINAR 17TH APRIL 2025: SOME INTERESTING TOPICS TO TACKLE…

April 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Injuries to those involved in sports are not unusual.  The issues relating to whether injuries are the result of negligence are complex ones. This webinar looks at the law relating to sporting injuries and, importantly, at the practical issues that…

ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: THE CASES SINCE SWIFT -v- CARPENTER: WEBINAR 15th APRIL 2025

ACCOMMODATION AND APPLIANCE CLAIMS: THE CASES SINCE SWIFT -v- CARPENTER: WEBINAR 15th APRIL 2025

April 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

Issues relating to accommodation costs and aids and appliances feature in many moderate to serious personal injury cases.  There are relatively few cases where the principles governing damages are considered. This webinar looks at the principles and the practical steps…

EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS JUST ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS: EXPERT CONCEDES THAT PARTS OF THEIR EVIDENCE WAS "APPALLING": ONE OF THE PARTIES DESCRIBED IT AS "TERRIFYING"

EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS JUST ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS: EXPERT CONCEDES THAT PARTS OF THEIR EVIDENCE WAS “APPALLING”: ONE OF THE PARTIES DESCRIBED IT AS “TERRIFYING”

April 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In LB Croydon v D (Critical Scrutiny of the Paedeatric Overview) [2024] EWFC 438 HHJ Kathryn Major (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) was severely critical of the medical evidence called by the local authority.  That part of the…

PROVING THINGS TWO 257: TWO (PRESUMABLY VERY EXPENSIVE EXPERTS) ON LOSS AND THEY ARE BOTH OF NO HELP TO THE COURT:

PROVING THINGS TWO 257: TWO (PRESUMABLY VERY EXPENSIVE EXPERTS) ON LOSS AND THEY ARE BOTH OF NO HELP TO THE COURT:

March 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In H&P Advisory Limited v Barrick Gold (Holdings) Limited (formerly Randgold Resources Limited) [2025] EWHC 562 (Ch)   Mr Simon Gleeson found that the experts for each party were of no assistance in assessing the value of the work done by…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 3: EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS NOT NECESSARY, NOT PROPORTIONATE AND DID NOT REALLY RELATE TO THE PLEADED ISSUES

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 3: EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS NOT NECESSARY, NOT PROPORTIONATE AND DID NOT REALLY RELATE TO THE PLEADED ISSUES

March 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There is a consideration of the principles relating to the use of expert evidence in the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Cohen & Ors v Co-operative Group Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 526 (Ch).  The judge rejected the claimants’…

SERIES OF 10 WEBINARS ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: AND YOU CAN BUY A "SEASON TICKET"

SERIES OF 10 WEBINARS ON PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: AND YOU CAN BUY A “SEASON TICKET”

March 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

The APIL Damages Series is 10 webinars looking at key elements of law and practice relating to personal injury damages.  The webinars can be bought and watched individually. APIL has a special offer for all 10, details available here.  …

"THIS IS AN UNUSUAL PROBATE CLAIM IN THAT THE DECEASED SAYS SHE IS VERY MUCH ALIVE": A CHAOTIC TRIAL WHERE NO-ONE SEEMS TO HAVE THE SAME PAGINATION IN THE BUNDLES: AND THATS NOT EVEN HALF OF THE PROBLEMS...

“THIS IS AN UNUSUAL PROBATE CLAIM IN THAT THE DECEASED SAYS SHE IS VERY MUCH ALIVE”: A CHAOTIC TRIAL WHERE NO-ONE SEEMS TO HAVE THE SAME PAGINATION IN THE BUNDLES: AND THATS NOT EVEN HALF OF THE PROBLEMS…

March 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Members Content

 The past few weeks have led to a number of cases about bundles. My working theory about trial and application bundles is that problematic bundles often reflect a  much deeper malaise in the case itself.   Support for that theory can…

PROVING THINGS 256: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY AFTER FALLING FROM A HORSE: THE ANIMALS ACT CONSIDERED

PROVING THINGS 256: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY AFTER FALLING FROM A HORSE: THE ANIMALS ACT CONSIDERED

March 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

This blog has looked at the judgment in Boyd v Hughes [2025] EWHC 435 (KB) several times in relation to procedural issues and assertions of dishonesty.  However the case, ultimately, was about a claimant who was injured when she fell…

AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH EXPERT WITNESSES: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2025: DEALS WITH SOME "INTERESTING" ISSUES: EXPERTS BEHAVING BADLY

AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH EXPERT WITNESSES: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2025: DEALS WITH SOME “INTERESTING” ISSUES: EXPERTS BEHAVING BADLY

February 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

This webinar deals, among other things, with three cases where solicitors have been struck off the Roll because of their conduct with expert witnesses. In one of those cases the solicitor also went to prison. The Court of Appeal held…

SENSIBLE STEPS TO TAKE WHEN THERE IS NO TRANSCRIPT OF A HEARING AVAILABLE

SENSIBLE STEPS TO TAKE WHEN THERE IS NO TRANSCRIPT OF A HEARING AVAILABLE

February 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

A very short passage in the judgment of  Mr Justice Fancourt in Odhavji v Tighe & Ors [2025] EWHC 372 (Ch) sets out the steps a prudent party should take when a transcript (and sometimes a judgment) cannot be obtained. …

EXPERTS AT TRIAL: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WITH DIRECT PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF THE ISSUE BEING CONSIDERED

EXPERTS AT TRIAL: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WITH DIRECT PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF THE ISSUE BEING CONSIDERED

February 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Dobson v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police [2025] EWHC 272 (KB) HHJ Bird (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered which expert should be accepted in the context of a case against the police.  He preferred the expert with…

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 14th FEBRUARY 2025

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 14th FEBRUARY 2025

February 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

Expert evidence plays a critical, often decisive, role in clinical negligence litigation. An ability to assess expert evidence is a key part of the litigator’s role.  This webinar looks at the rules and cases that govern the credibility of expert…

CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE - BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE

CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE – BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE

February 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to Professor Keith Rix for allowing me to use an article that appears in February’s Expert Healthcare Witness Matters*.  This deals with the question of whether an expert can, or should, agree to act on a conditional…

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (?) PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 7th FEBRUARY 2025

WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (?) PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 7th FEBRUARY 2025

January 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

This blog regularly features cases where there have been issues, sometimes major problems, with expert evidence.  This webinar takes a close look at the factors that the courts take into account when considering which expert’s view should be accepted.  It…

WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE GOES WRONG : THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE INFORMATION BEING GIVEN TO THE EXPERT

WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE GOES WRONG : THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE INFORMATION BEING GIVEN TO THE EXPERT

January 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have looked at the judgment in Aviva Insurance Ltd v Nadeem & Anor [2024] EWHC 3445 (KB) HHJ Tindal (sitting as  Judge of the High Court) before, in the context of the failure of committal proceedings following an earlier finding…

COURT REFUSES PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN "INAPPROPRIATE DISTRACTION": A REPORT WAS "IN FACT LEGAL ARGUMENTS DRESSED UP AS ECONOMIC EXPERTISE"

COURT REFUSES PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN “INAPPROPRIATE DISTRACTION”: A REPORT WAS “IN FACT LEGAL ARGUMENTS DRESSED UP AS ECONOMIC EXPERTISE”

January 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Kington SARL v Thames Water Utilities Holdings Ltd (Rev1) [2025] EWHC 84 (Ch) Mr Justice Trower rejected the applicant’s application to rely on expert evidence.   The proposed expert report was to “uncertain” and, in any event, unlikely to assist…

OGDEN TABLES UPDATED TO INCLUDE + 0.5% RATE

OGDEN TABLES UPDATED TO INCLUDE + 0.5% RATE

January 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Useful links

An updated set of Additional Tables have been added to The Ogden Tables today  to include the 0.5% rate that came into force in January. THE UPDATES The updates can be found on this link. … Enjoying this post? Become a…

CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF IN 2024: SOME FACTS AND FIGURES

CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF IN 2024: SOME FACTS AND FIGURES

December 28, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content

As 2024 draws to a close this is  a good time to look back at the year in terms of civil procedure.   There have been 463 posts  to date this year amounting to 938 thousand words (I haven’t counted them…

"PROFESSIONALISM DEMANDS THAT LAWYERS PICK THEIR BATTLES WISELY": JUDGE GRANTS EXTENSION AND ORDERS THE LAWYERS TO GO TO LUNCH TOGETHER...

“PROFESSIONALISM DEMANDS THAT LAWYERS PICK THEIR BATTLES WISELY”: JUDGE GRANTS EXTENSION AND ORDERS THE LAWYERS TO GO TO LUNCH TOGETHER…

December 16, 2024 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Extensions of time, Members Content

Coming to the end of the year, and with Christmas nearly upon us, all lawyers  could benefit from reading the judgment of Chief U.S. District Judge David Proctor in McCullers v. Koch Foods of Ala., LLC in 2024 WL 4907226…

JUST BECAUSE I DIDN'T ACCEPT YOUR EVIDENCE THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU WERE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: ANOTHER LOOK AT THE SAMRAI DECISION

JUST BECAUSE I DIDN’T ACCEPT YOUR EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T MEAN YOU WERE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: ANOTHER LOOK AT THE SAMRAI DECISION

December 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Rashpal Samrai & Ors v Rajinder Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer did not make a finding of fundamental dishonesty in a case where he did not accept the claimants’ evidence.  This non-acceptance did not lead to…

AN EXPERT WHO "HAD NO REGARD TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION" AND "WHO WAS PREPARED MATERIALLY TO MISLEAD THE COURT"

AN EXPERT WHO “HAD NO REGARD TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION” AND “WHO WAS PREPARED MATERIALLY TO MISLEAD THE COURT”

December 10, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Rashpal Samrai & Ors v Rajinder Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer made extremely trenchant findings about the conduct of an expert witness instructed on behalf of the claimants.  There was no compliance with Rules or Guidance for…

EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: DEVELOPMENTS IN 2024: "WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL?": SOME INTERESTING WEBINARS IN THE NEAR FUTURE

EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: DEVELOPMENTS IN 2024: “WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL?”: SOME INTERESTING WEBINARS IN THE NEAR FUTURE

December 9, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

Issues relating to expert evidence have formed a large part of the material considered in this blog so far this year.  The webinar on the 11th December reviews the key cases and their significance for practitioners and experts alike.  Webinars…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: FALSE EVIDENCE: A FALSE CV: "I AM ENTITLED TO REJECT THE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE BECAUSE IT IS BUILT UPON A FALSE FACTUAL BASIS"

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: FALSE EVIDENCE: A FALSE CV: “I AM ENTITLED TO REJECT THE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE BECAUSE IT IS BUILT UPON A FALSE FACTUAL BASIS”

December 5, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Amy Birchall of HF solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Scully -v- Atherton (& others).  The judge found that the claimant (someone who had held a number of jobs…

THIS IS NOT EXPERT OPINION BUT "ARGUMENTS" SAYS THE JUDGE: PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT NOT GIVEN

THIS IS NOT EXPERT OPINION BUT “ARGUMENTS” SAYS THE JUDGE: PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT NOT GIVEN

November 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Norman v N & CJ Horton Property [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch) Master Clark found that proposed “expert evidence” was not evidence at all but simply opinions.  The person preparing the report was not allowed to give expert evidence on…

COST BITES 198: YET ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL REPORT/AGENCY FEE SAGA: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF THE BILL

COST BITES 198: YET ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL REPORT/AGENCY FEE SAGA: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF THE BILL

November 26, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Hot on the heels of publishing the previous post in relation to the judge’s refusal to order a breakdown of the agency fees involved in a medical report I received a copy of a case from Ben Millns of Kennedys. …

THE JUDGE SHOULD HAVE GRANTED AN ADJOURNMENT OF THE TRIAL: STRIKING OUT OF THE ACTION WHEN CLAIMANT DID NOT ATTEND THE PTR OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

THE JUDGE SHOULD HAVE GRANTED AN ADJOURNMENT OF THE TRIAL: STRIKING OUT OF THE ACTION WHEN CLAIMANT DID NOT ATTEND THE PTR OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

November 22, 2024 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Members Content

The judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Attaei v Alsharif & Ors [2024] EWHC 2972 (KB) is the second case this month where an appeal has been allowed against a refusal to grant an adjournment. In this case, however, the…

LIMITATION, DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS - THE KEY CASES OF 2024: WEBINAR 27th NOVEMBER 2024: HELPING YOU TO AVOID PROBLEMS IN 2O25 (AND BEYOND...)

LIMITATION, DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS – THE KEY CASES OF 2024: WEBINAR 27th NOVEMBER 2024: HELPING YOU TO AVOID PROBLEMS IN 2O25 (AND BEYOND…)

November 19, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Webinar

This webinar looks at the key cases relating to limitation, default and sanctions that have occurred in 2024.  The aim is to look at problem areas to help litigators avoid problems in the future. Booking details are available here.  THE…

EXPERTS, NEW EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DOUBT THE RELIABILITY OF AN EXPERT REPORT

EXPERTS, NEW EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DOUBT THE RELIABILITY OF AN EXPERT REPORT

November 13, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The Court of Appeal decision in  T (Fresh Evidence on Appeal) [2024] EWCA Civ 1384 is an appeal in a family court case. It contains important observations in relation to attempts to adduce new evidence at the appeal stage.  Equally…

PROVING THINGS 249: CYCLIST FAILS TO PROVE THAT A DEFECTIVE KERBSTONE WAS THE CAUSE OF AN ACCIDENT: BETTER PHOTOGRAPHS WOULD HELP

PROVING THINGS 249: CYCLIST FAILS TO PROVE THAT A DEFECTIVE KERBSTONE WAS THE CAUSE OF AN ACCIDENT: BETTER PHOTOGRAPHS WOULD HELP

November 8, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Robertson v Cornwall Council [2024] EWHC 2830 (KB) Mr Justice Linden dismissed an appeal in a case  where the claimant had failed to establish liability at trial.  The trial judge had found that the claimant had not established the…

DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH A WHOLE HOST OF ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY:

DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH A WHOLE HOST OF ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY:

November 7, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In  Cullen v Henniker-Major [2024] EWHC 2809 (KB) HHJ Ambrose (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) rejected the numerous allegations of fundamental dishonesty made by the defendant against the claimant.  The case may be an object lesson in…

CLAIM AGAINST ALLEGEDLY DISHONEST EXPERT NOT STRUCK OUT: THESE ISSUES SHOULD BE DETERMINED AT TRIAL

CLAIM AGAINST ALLEGEDLY DISHONEST EXPERT NOT STRUCK OUT: THESE ISSUES SHOULD BE DETERMINED AT TRIAL

November 6, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Striking out

In  EUI Ltd (t/a Admiral) v Smith [2024] EWHC 2803 (KB) Mr Justice Griffiths refused an expert’s application to strike out the case against him.  He upheld the decision of the Circuit Judge and stated that the issues should go…

PROVING THINGS 248: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH ANY CASE AS TO CAUSATION IN A NEGLIGENCE CASE AGAINST SOLICITORS

PROVING THINGS 248: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH ANY CASE AS TO CAUSATION IN A NEGLIGENCE CASE AGAINST SOLICITORS

November 4, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

In Blower v GH Canfields LLP [2024] EWHC 2763 (Ch) HHJ Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected a claimant’s case on negligence against a firm of solicitors who had reached a settlement of an action against her and…

WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS TO CHANGE JOBS, EARNS MORE THAN BEFORE - BUT THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL AWARD FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE VERY REAL VALUE OF "FRINGE BENEFITS"

WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS TO CHANGE JOBS, EARNS MORE THAN BEFORE – BUT THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL AWARD FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE VERY REAL VALUE OF “FRINGE BENEFITS”

October 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

A webinar on the 5th November looks at loss of earnings from the point of view of loss of benefits and pension claims.  It is important that the very real value of “fringe” benefits is not overlooked when looking at…

← Previous 1 2 3 4 … 12 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)

Top Posts

  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE "ON DEMAND"
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: "VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL"
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..

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.