Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Group Litigation Orders
AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT FOR ABUSE OR PROCESS ADJOURNED - TO SEE WHETHER THIS NEED HAPPEN ON A "ROLLING BASIS": ONE THOUSAND CLAIMANTS STARTED BUT ARE UNLIKELY TO FINISH...

AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT FOR ABUSE OR PROCESS ADJOURNED – TO SEE WHETHER THIS NEED HAPPEN ON A “ROLLING BASIS”: ONE THOUSAND CLAIMANTS STARTED BUT ARE UNLIKELY TO FINISH…

July 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

Here we have a case where it appears that 1,000 claimants involved in Group Litigation will seek to discontinue. This fact becoming clear less than a month after the Group Litigation Order was made.   The judge declined to strike out…

FIVE THOUSAND CLAIMANTS AND JUST EIGHT COURT FEES:  COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION ON CPR 7.3

FIVE THOUSAND CLAIMANTS AND JUST EIGHT COURT FEES: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION ON CPR 7.3

July 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In this case the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that some 5,000 individual small value cases could proceed together as, essentially, one action.  The provisions of CPR 7.3 were considered and the Court held that the High Court Judge…

COURT REFUSES TO GRANT AN ORDER FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INCORRECT PROCEDURE; COSTS AND "WHACK -A-MOLE" CONSIDERED

COURT REFUSES TO GRANT AN ORDER FOR A GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INCORRECT PROCEDURE; COSTS AND “WHACK -A-MOLE” CONSIDERED

November 16, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

Several kind people have sent me a copy of the decision in Abbott & Ors v Ministry of Defence [2023] EWHC 2839 (KB). This is an unusual case because, despite the claimant and defendant being in agreement, the court did…

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANTS IN GROUP LITIGATION ORDER:  INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE: AN EXHAUSTING READ

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST CLAIMANTS IN GROUP LITIGATION ORDER: INDEMNITY COSTS APPROPRIATE: AN EXHAUSTING READ

September 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content

The judgment of Master Fontaine in The VW NOx Emissions Group Litigation [2018] EWHC 2308 (QB) is a warning to any litigator thinking of applying for a Group Litigation Order (“GLO”).  The rule is clear basically – get your case in…

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

  • COSTS BITES 461: WINNING THE CASE BUT LOSING THE MAIN BATTLE MEANS CLAIMANT RECOVERS 85% OF COSTS: DEFENDANT CANNOT SEEK THE ADVANTAGES OF PART 36 WITHOUT MAKING A PART 36 OFFER
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF DONE ABOUT … APPLYING TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE (2): A GUIDE FOR RESPONDENTS: 10 KEY POINTS WITH USEFUL LINKS
  • PROVING THINGS 297 : THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNED A FINDING THAT A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST: RECKLESSNESS AND CUTTING CORNERS ARE NOT THE SAME AS DISHONESTY
  • WHAT HAS CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF DONE ABOUT… APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE ? A GUIDE FOR APPLICANTS: 10 KEY POINTS WITH USEFUL LINKS
  • COST BITES 460: THE FACT THAT A DEFENDANT LOST ON A COUNTERCLAIM DID NOT PREVENT THE COURT FROM ORDERING THE CLAIMANT TO PAY 70% OF THEIR COSTS: ORDER UPHELD ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT

Top Posts

DECODING THE DIRECTORIES: ALSO WHO ASSESSES THOSE WHO ASSESS US: CAN LAWYERS BITE BACK? A WHOLLY FICTIONAL EXAMPLE...
THE CHANCERY DIVISION IS NO MORE: A PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT
AI AND CIVIL JUSTICE: PREPARING FOR THE TSUNAMI – LORD BRIGGS ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE, PROCEDURAL RULES AND THE HUMAN JUDGE
MILLIONS OF DOCUMENTS, 27 FACTUAL WITNESSES AND THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY: WITNESS EVIDENCE IN THE MANCHESTER CITY PROCEEDINGS
EXPERT WATCH 76 : EXPERT EVIDENCE MAY ASSIST, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS REASONABLY REQUIRED: PERMISSION REFUSED IN AN APPEAL WORTH TENS OF MILLIONS

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.