Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Expert witness » Page 5

REVISITING WHITEHOUSE -v- JORDAN 2: ON THE LAWYERS DRAFTING THE EXPERTS' REPORTS

August 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

The first post in this series on the judgments in Whitehouse -v- Jordan in the Court of Appeal and House of Lords  looked at the point that, at the appeal stage, the courts were only concerned with whether they could…

ATTRITIONAL WARFARE; UNMERITORIOUS POINTS AND UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH: SO MUCH (AND MORE) IN ONE JUDGMENT

August 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Conduct, Damages, Default judgment,, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment today of Mr Justice Edis in  Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust makes for uncomfortable reading on the issue of the general attitude of the lawyers towards the conduct of the litigation.   In addition to…

PROVING THINGS 28: MAKE UNWARRANTED PERSONAL ATTACKS AND USE A "MUD-SLINGING" EXPERT: THAT ALWAYS ENDS WELL

August 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Scott -v- E.A.R. Sheppard Consulting & Civil Engineering Ltd [2016] 1949 (TCC) contains some surprising observations. It also contains important lessons in relation to “conspiracy” theories in litigation and the role of the…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 2: EXPERTS, OH EXPERTS.

July 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

This is the second in the series of posts on the  judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages. Here we look…

EXPERT SHOPPING: CHANGING EXPERTS AND DISCLOSURE OF REPORTS

May 27, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Suspicions are often aroused when an party wants to change expert mid-way through a case.  There is, usually, a requirement that before a court grants permission to instruct a new expert the previous report has to be disclosed. The case…

EXPERTS:YOU'RE NOT RIGHT JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE FAMOUS: A DECISION NOT WRITTEN ON THE BACK OF A FAG PACKET

May 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Green  in British American Tobacco (UK) Limited -v- Secretary of State for Health [2016] EWHC 1169 is 1,000 paragraphs long. It covers many aspects of law and procedure. I want to concentrate upon one issue….

THE INTERCHANGE BETWEEN LAWYERS & EXPERTS: A DIFFICULT ISSUE

May 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In a week where there is a report of an application being made for a doctor to be committed for contempt* it is prudent to consider that difficult issue of the relationship between the lawyers in a case and the…

PROVING THINGS 15: DAMAGES & EVIDENCE: GOING BACK TO COLLEGE

April 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

One harsh shock for many litigants occurs when they are asked to prove their damages at trial. We have looked several times when a litigant has come to grief at this stage, largely because there is no evidential support for…

EXPERT REPORTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: PART 35 APPLIES

April 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Case Management, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Khaled -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 857 (Admin) Mr Justice Garnham considered Part 35 of the CPR and the admissibility of expert reports in proceedings in the Administrative Court. “The…

IS THIS AN EXPERT REPORT I SEE BEFORE ME? I THINK NOT

March 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Al Nehayan -v- Kent [2016] EWHC 623 (QB) Mrs Justice Nicola Davies made observations upon “expert” evidence that had been placed before the court.  There were major failures of form as well as of substance.  The judgment contains an…

EXPERTS AND FACTS: IT IS ALL IN THE RULES

February 17, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

Following the post yesterday about proving things and the role of experts there was an interesting comment from Elfed Williams. WHAT DOES AN EXPERT DO ABOUT FACTS? “I have some misgivings about whether an expert should identify primary facts and…

PROVING THINGS 9: THE ROLE OF EXPERTS

February 16, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Here I want to pick up on a few observations of Mr Justice Snowden in Grant -v-Ralls [2016] EWHC 243 (Ch) a case we looked at yesterday.   That is the role of the experts. It is dangerous to defer the “proving”…

PERMISSION NOT GRANTED TO CALL EMPLOYMENT EXPERTS: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine [2016] EWHC 45 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone and Master Leslie considered the rules and case law in relation to the need to call expert witnesses in detail. KEY POINTS The claimants were refused…

THAT DIFFICULT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN EXPERT WITNESS AND AN ADVOCATE

December 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

In AAW -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKUT 673 (IAT) Upper Tribunal Judge Southern made some telling observations on the role of an expert. The judgment is of general interest in relation to the role…

WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO DISCLOSE THAT THEY KNOW THE PARTIES

December 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

A recent high profile criminal case has identified the major problems that can arise when an expert called to give evidence has failed to disclose that they have had previous dealings with the parties.  Here we look at how the…

LATE EXPERT EVIDENCE, DENTON AND WAVING A FINGER IN THE AIR

December 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Bundles, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The decision of the Court of Appeal in O’Connor -v- The Pennine Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWCA 1244 will receive much attention for the important observations made as to evidence, proof and “res ipsa loquitur”.   However here I want…

WHEN THE CREDIBILITY OF THE LAY AND EXPERT WITNESSES LIES IN SHREDS

November 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The previous post in relation to Part 36 led me to examine the substantive judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Van Oord UK Limited -v- Allseas UK Limited [2015] EWHC 3074 (TCC). It contains as damning an assessment of witness…

WITNESS EVIDENCE & THE BURDEN OF PROOF: A CIVIL TRIAL IS NOT A SEARCH FOR THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH: FOOTBALLERS ON TRIAL

October 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Anyone looking for a detailed consideration of the law relating to witness evidence and the burden of proof can find it in the judgment of His Honour Judge Butler  (sitting as a High Court judge) in GB -v- Stoke City…

THE EXPERT WITNESS THAT TELLS THE JUDGE THE "FACTS": A REVIEW OF RECENT CASES

October 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

There have been a number of recent cases where judges have considered the effect of expert witnesses commenting on primary facts. The judiciary have traditionally, and rightly, guarded their role as primary fact finder.  However this does not appear to…

GUIDANCE TO EXPERTS: CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL: WHO DOES AN EXPERT "REPRESENT"?

September 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

It is rare that lawyers can look to the British Dental Journal for advice on procedure and evidence.  However there is a beautifully phrased letter in the British Dental Journal “reviewing a review”. THE LETTER The writer was commenting on…

CASE MANAGEMENT, NECESSITY AND EXPERTS: BA -v- SPENCER: IS EXPERT EVIDENCE "REASONABLY REQUIRED"?

August 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Case Management, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In his decision today in British Airways Plc -v- Spencer [2015] EWHC 2477 (Ch) Mr Justice Warren made important observations about the need for expert evidence.  The judge overturned a case management decision that expert evidence was not necessary and…

ASSESSING EXPERT EVIDENCE: GUIDANCE FROM VICTORIA

August 21, 2015 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Useful links

There are many cases where a judge has to determine differences between experts.  It is helpful for practitioners to know what factors are taken into account when assessing evidence . The Judicial College of Victoria puts all its guidance to…

EXPERT EVIDENCE IN INSURANCE CASES 2: BRIT UW LIMITED: FAILURE TO DISCLOSE UNDERMINED DEFENDANT'S CASE

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are, coincidentally, two recent cases on the use of expert witnesses in insurance disputes.  In Brit UW Limited -v- F & B Trenchless Solutions Limited [2015] EWHC 2237 (Comm) Mrs Justice Carr DBE considered the utility of expert evidence…

EXPERT WITNESSES IN INSURANCE CASES 1: INVOLNERT MANAGEMENT

August 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Involnert Management Inc -v- AIS Insurance Services Limited [2015] EWHC 2225 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt considered the evidence of experts in a case between insurer and insured and, more particularly,between the insured and insurance broker. THE CASE The defendants…

THE CHIPS ARE DOWN FOR EXPERT WHO FAILED TO DECLARE AN INTEREST

July 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

In The Ritz Hotel Casino Ltd -v- Al Geabury [2015] EWHC 2294(QB) Mrs Justice Simler DBE was critical of an expert who failed to declare an interest in a case. The expert had become a treating doctor. “It was no…

APPEAL COURT CAN DECIDE ISSUES BETWEEN EXPERTS ON FOREIGN LAW: AND ANOTHER LOOK AT WITNESS STATEMENTS

June 25, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

 The issue of when an appeal can court take its own view on expert evidence was considered in Group Seven Limited -v- Allied Investment Corporation Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 631. The judgment at first instance also makes for informative reading…

ANOTHER UNSATISFACTORY EXPERT: WITH A WRONG VIEW OF HIS ROLE

June 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Sinclair -v- Joyner [2015] EWHC Civ 1800 (QB)  Mrs Justice Cox made some important observations about the role of the expert and the conduct of the expert instructed by the defendant in that case. THE CASE The claimant was…

CAUSATION AND EVIDENCE – A BURNING PROBLEM? IMPORTANT ISSUES FROM A BIZARRE SET OF FACTS

June 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Graves -v- Brouwer [2015] EWCA Civ 595 the Court of Appeal carried out an extensive review of the principles and authorities relating to evidence and causation.  There is a useful discussion on the role and questioning of experts at…

EXPERT REPORTS: TOO LONG AND NOT MUCH USE: CARE EXPERTS MUST TAKE MORE CARE

June 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In the case of Harman -v- East Kent Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 1662 (QB) Mr Justice Turner had some very clear criticisms of the expert reports. Some of the comments are of general importance. “Against the background of…

THE MEETING OF EXPERTS: CASE LAW AND GUIDANCE

June 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Members Content

The case of Cintas Corp No 2 -v- Rhino Developments (2015 Ch D Newey J 10/6/2015) * reported on Lawtel today provides an interesting scenario in relation to the conduct of an expert and joint meetings. There is relatively little…

EXPERTS GOING ON A FROLIC: A FAMILY LAW CASE WHERE THE EXPERT WITNESS WAS "THOROUGHLY UNHELPFUL"

June 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Members Content

The conduct of experts has been considered many times on this blog.  There is an interesting example of problems caused in the context of family law in M -v- M [2015] EWFC B63.  Here we have an expert going well…

I DIDN'T MEAN IT WHEN I SIGNED THE JOINT REPORT: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN EXPERTS CHANGE THEIR MINDS?

May 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt in Iraqi Civilians -v- Ministry of Defence [2015] EWHC 1254 (QB) contains some interesting passages in relation to an expert reneging from the contents of a joint report. In particular what is the appropriate…

AN EXPERT MUST DISCLOSE DETAILS OF PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH A PARTY OTHERWISE THE CONSEQUENCES CAN BE DIRE: EXP -v- BARKER

May 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Experts, Members Content

The facts in relation to the Defendant’s expert witness in the case  of EXP -v- Barker [2015] EWHC 1289 (QB) are quite remarkable. The case shows the importance of an expert disclosing their history of dealing with the person on…

COSTS OF EXPERTS AND GOING OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET: THE HIGH COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND BUDGETED ITEMS AFTER A TRIAL

April 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Expert evidence, Members Content

In Parish -v- The Danwood Group Ltd [2015] EWHC 940(QB) HH Judge Behrens (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered various issues relating to the costs budget at the end of a trial. THE CASE The claimants were…

ADJOURNMENT GRANTED WHEN MEDICAL EXPERT "UNABLE" TO ATTEND: BETTER EVIDENCE NEEDED IN FUTURE

March 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In D -v- the Secretary of State for Health [2015] EWHC 867(QB) Mr Justice Foskett granted the claimant when an important expert was unable to attend for somewhat unusual reasons. The judgment was designed to set out clear guidance for…

LET THE COURT KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT IS GOING TO COST: A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT

January 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Expert evidence, Members Content

The short judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Sloutsker -v- Romanova [2015] EWHC 81(QB) contains some important observations about preparing for hearings. It also serves as a timely reminder that a party asking for permission to instruct an expert must…

BEWARE THE EXPERT WHO "LECTURES" THE COURT (AND TELLS THE JUDGE WHO TO BELIEVE)

January 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Walls -v- London Eastern Railway Ltd (N Wilkinson QC) 05/12/2014* the judge found that the claimant’s continuing back pain was caused by a long-standing degenerative spinal condition rather than an accident. THE JUDGE’S COMMENTARY ON THE EXPERT EVIDENCE One…

ASSESSING WITNESSES: A UNIVERSAL ISSUE IN LITIGATION

December 8, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judge’s assessment of witnesses is often the crucial element in most cases that go to trial. This applies at every level, from the small claims arbitration to the most complex commercial dispute (and, of course, high profile defamation actions)….

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT HARM RATHER THAN HELP AND A FAILURE TO PROVE DAMAGES: A HIGH COURT CASE EXAMINED

November 22, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Re-Use Collections Limited -v- Sendall &  May Glass Recycling Ltd [2014] EWHC 3852 (QB) H.H. Judge Davies made some important observations about drafting witness statements. It is positively unwise to “cross-reference” witness statements to the evidence of other witnesses…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY, BOLAM AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: A HIGH COURT DECISION

November 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Stephens J in McGovern  -v- Sharkey [2014] NIQB 117 contains some important observations in relation to the Bolam test and the role of evidence and experts in this context. It demonstrates that the credibility of a lay…

MORE ON EXPERTS: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES TAINTS THE EVIDENCE BADLY

November 6, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content

We  have already looked at one of the observations on experts by HH Simon Barker QC in Bacciotinni & Cook -v- Gotelle & Goldsmith [2014] EWHC  3257 Ch. There we looked at “over eager” experts. The judge also had something to…

MITCHELL: THE CASE THAT KEEPS ON GIVING: EXPERT EVIDENCE; SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE AND THE EDITING OF WITNESS STATEMENTS

November 2, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Regular readers of this blog will need no introduction to the procedural issues that Mitchell -v- News Group Newspapers Ltd has given rise to already.  Procedural issues have arisen again and were considered by Mr Justice Warby (2014 EWHC 3590…

THE ROLE OF THE APPELLATE COURT IN CONSIDERING FINDINGS OF FACT

October 15, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Clydesdale Bank -v- Duffy [2014] EWCA Civ 1260 the Court of Appeal set out a clear statement of the limited role of the appeal court in considering appeals in relation to findings of fact by the trial judge. THE…

THE CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES; JOINT MEETINGS AND OVERREACHING EXPERTS: A CASE TO POINT

October 6, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Dingemans in Garcia -v- Associated Newspapers Ltd [2014] EWHC 3137 is a defamation action. It contains some interesting examples of evidential issues and problems. Firstly relating to the assessment of witnesses; secondly in relation to…

THE JUDGE, THE EXPERT, CAUSATION AND DAMAGES: THE APPROPRIATE APPROACH WHEN THE DEFENDANT HAS MADE A BAD SITUATION WORSE

September 20, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content

The decision of Foskett J in Reaney -v- University Hospital of North Staffordshire NHS Trust [2014] EWHC 2016 (QB) contains important observations on the role of the judge and the expert in assessing damages for care. It also contains a…

ADDUCING A SECOND EXPERT WITNESS LATE IN THE DAY: THWAYTES -v- SOTHEBYS CONSIDERED

September 18, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

There is a brief report on Lawtel today of a decision of Rose J in Thwaytes -v- Sothebys (16/09/2014) where permission was given for the defendant to rely on an additional expert and the application was heard six weeks before…

WHAT IS THE POSITION WHEN LEGAL COSTS ARE CLAIMED AS A HEAD OF DAMAGES?

September 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content

The case of Rentokil Initial -v- Goodman Derrick LLP [2014] EWHC 2994 (Ch) was looked at in the previous post in relation to evidence.  However it also raised an interesting issue as to the approach a court should take when a…

PROTOCOL FOR THE INSTRUCTION OF EXPERTS: THE NEW BITS

August 27, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content

There has been much coverage of the forthcoming changes to the guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims.  There have been several additions which impose specific duties upon solicitors.  SOLICITOR MUST MAKE POSITION CLEAR IF FURTHER DOCUMENTS ARE…

PRINCIPLES OF MITIGATION OF LOSS & THE CREDIBILITY OF EXPERT WITNESSES: A HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

July 31, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Liability, Members Content

The case of Hirtenstein -v- Hill Dickinson LLP [2014]  EWHC 2711 (Comm) where judgment was given today contains many interesting lessons for those involved in professional negligence litigation in particular.   Here I just want to concentrate upon two: (i)…

INSTRUCTING EXPERT WITNESSES: VIEWS FROM "ACROSS THE POND"

June 24, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Useful links

Instructing expert witnesses is an important step in many actions.  The advantages, and problems, caused by experts are well known.  It is clear that the issues are international.  A recent article in the American Journal “The Lawyerist” contains some interesting…

← Previous 1 … 4 5 6 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 35.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • MAZUR RECORDING – NOW AVAILABLE
  • MAZUR MATTERS 10: THE STATUTORY DEFENCE TO THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE: WHY YOU (PROBABLY) WON’T GO TO JAIL: BUT THE POSITION GOING FORWARD MAY BE DIFFERENT…
  • THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ALLOW A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION AGAINST THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS TO PROCEED TO STAGE 2: MUCH TO THINK ABOUT HERE FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS (AND INDEED ANYONE WHO DRAFTS PLEADINGS)
  • MAZUR MATTERS 9: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE “CONDUCT OF LITIGATION”? (2): AN EARLY COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WHICH HELPS
  • PART 36: SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION SO THAT THE NORMAL PART 36 PROVISIONS DO NOT APPLY? THE HIGH COURT CONSIDERS THE “FORMIDABLE OBSTACLE”…

Top Posts

  • MAZUR MATTERS 10: THE STATUTORY DEFENCE TO THE CRIMINAL OFFENCE: WHY YOU (PROBABLY) WON'T GO TO JAIL: BUT THE POSITION GOING FORWARD MAY BE DIFFERENT...
  • MAZUR MATTERS 9: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION"? (2): AN EARLY COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WHICH HELPS
  • MAZUR RECORDING - NOW AVAILABLE
  • MAZUR MATTERS 8: WHAT IS MEANT BY THE "CONDUCT OF LITIGATION" (1): HOW HELPFUL ARE THE REGULATORS?
  • THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO ALLOW A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION AGAINST THE CLAIMANT'S SOLICITORS TO PROCEED TO STAGE 2: MUCH TO THINK ABOUT HERE FOR CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS (AND INDEED ANYONE WHO DRAFTS PLEADINGS)

Archives

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 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 National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2023
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025. 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 © 2025 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop