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. Hardwicke, London
Browse: Home » Mitchell
APPLICATION FOR RELIEF REFUSED AFTER LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF REFUSED AFTER LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS

March 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In SRI Lalithambika Foods Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 761 (Admin) Charles Bourne QC, sitting as a High Court Judge, refused the claimant’s application to rely on witness statements…

FRESH PROCEEDINGS CAN BE ISSUED IF FIRST PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE DECEASED WERE A NULLITY: DENTON CONSIDERED

FRESH PROCEEDINGS CAN BE ISSUED IF FIRST PROCEEDINGS ON BEHALF OF THE DECEASED WERE A NULLITY: DENTON CONSIDERED

February 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Relief from sanctions

In the judgment today in Hutson & Anor, The Personal Representatives of v Tata Steel UK Ltd [2019] EWHC 143 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered several points relating to the ability of those acting on behalf of an estate to…

5th BIRTHDAY REVIEW 4: AVOIDING PROBLEMS AFTER MITCHELL: LIVING IN THE SHADOW OF THE BIKE

5th BIRTHDAY REVIEW 4: AVOIDING PROBLEMS AFTER MITCHELL: LIVING IN THE SHADOW OF THE BIKE

June 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

It is universally recognised that the Court of Appeal judgment in Mitchell  was a mistake.   The Master of the Rolls  stated that the decision in Mitchell decision led to a “febrile atmosphere”  leading to “unreasonable decision making”. There were 219…

THE IMPORTANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION

THE IMPORTANCE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE AND RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATIONS TO EXTEND TIME: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION

May 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions

This post is caused by a search term that arrived on this blog today “Is an application for an extension of time an application for relief from sanctions?“. The short answer to that is – it depends.  An application made after…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED WHEN CLAIMANT ISSUES IN BREACH OF CIVIL RESTRAINT ORDER

December 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

In Couper v Irwin Mitchell LLP & Ors [2017] EWHC 3231 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when the claimant had issued proceedings in breach of a civil restraint order. The claimant, however, was given…

DENTON PRINCIPLES LEAD TO APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS BEING STRUCK OUT: THE CONTINUANCE OF THE APPLICATION WAS DISPROPORTIONATE

DENTON PRINCIPLES LEAD TO APPLICATION FOR WASTED COSTS BEING STRUCK OUT: THE CONTINUANCE OF THE APPLICATION WAS DISPROPORTIONATE

December 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Relief from sanctions, Wasted Costs

The Denton principles were applied by the Administrative Court in  Haigh v Westminster Magistrates Court & Or [2017] EWHC 3197 (Admin) when striking out an application for wasted costs. “It must not be forgotten that these are satellite proceedings, adjectival to…

NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE "BEYOND" THE 11th HOUR NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED IN THE TCC

NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE “BEYOND” THE 11th HOUR NOT ALLOWED: DENTON APPLIED IN THE TCC

December 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Relief from sanctions

In DPM Property Services Ltd v Emerson Crane Hire Ltd [2017] EWHC 3092 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson overturned a decision giving a counterclaiming defendant permission to rely upon an expert report on quantum shortly before trial. The case is an example…

THE DENTON CRITERIA AND DISHONESTY: TELLING A LIE MAY NOT BE "SIGNIFICANT" BUT IT IS ALWAYS SERIOUS.

THE DENTON CRITERIA AND DISHONESTY: TELLING A LIE MAY NOT BE “SIGNIFICANT” BUT IT IS ALWAYS SERIOUS.

November 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Disclosure, Relief from sanctions

I am grateful to John McQuater for sending me through a copy of the judgment of His Honour Judge Robinson in the case of Wadsley -v- Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (a copy of that judgment is available here Wadsley…

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DETAILS OF CLAIM DO NOT CONSTITUTE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DETAILS OF CLAIM DO NOT CONSTITUTE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

October 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents

In Chelsea Bridge Apartments Ltd -v- Old Street Homes Ltd (Deputy Master Cousins, 4th September 2017*) Deputy Master Cousins refused the claimants’ application for relief from sanctions in failing to serve Particulars of claim on time. “I find that the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS  FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER:  APPLICATION REFUSED:  A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FOLLOWING BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: APPLICATION REFUSED: A WORKING HOLIDAY IS NO EXCUSE

September 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

In The Financial Conduct Authority v Da Vinci Invest Ltd & Ors [2017] EWHC 2220 (Ch) Mr Justice Snowden rejected a defendant’s application for relief from sanctions for breach of a peremptory order. It is unusual in that the court considered…

COSTS BUDGET ONE DAY LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DON'T MAKE MOUNTAINS OUT OF MOLEHILLS BUT PUT THINGS RIGHT - QUICKLY

COSTS BUDGET ONE DAY LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: DON’T MAKE MOUNTAINS OUT OF MOLEHILLS BUT PUT THINGS RIGHT – QUICKLY

July 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs budgeting, Relief from sanctions

There are only two realistic options in relation to a relief from sanctions application: (i) do it properly and promptly; (ii) don’t do it all.  The dangers of a hasty application are illustrated in the judgment in Lakhani -v- Mahmud…

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS - AN ANALYSIS 3: AN ADJOURNMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED:  A BLAMELESS CLIENT IS NOT A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS – AN ANALYSIS 3: AN ADJOURNMENT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: A BLAMELESS CLIENT IS NOT A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD

June 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Relief from sanctions

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner overturned an order giving the claimant relief from sanctions following late service of the witness statement. In the third of the series looking at the case more closely we…

APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL TO ALLOW LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL: CLAIMANT'S APPEAL DISMISSED

APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL TO ALLOW LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL: CLAIMANT’S APPEAL DISMISSED

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

There are a surprising number of cases and appeals in relation to late service of witness evidence. In Byrne -v- Mullan [2017] EWHC 1387 (Ch) the claimant made an application to adduce new witness evidence which was heard on the…

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS - AN ANALYSIS 2: WHY (IN THEORY) THE DEFAULTING CLAIMANT COULD STILL RELY ON THE LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS – AN ANALYSIS 2: WHY (IN THEORY) THE DEFAULTING CLAIMANT COULD STILL RELY ON THE LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE

June 19, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner overturned an order giving the claimant relief from sanctions following late service of the witness statement. In the second of the series looking at the case more closely we…

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS - AN ANALYSIS 1: WHAT WENT WRONG

GLADWIN & SANCTIONS – AN ANALYSIS 1: WHAT WENT WRONG

June 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner overturned an order giving the claimant relief from sanctions following late service of the witness statement. In a series looking at the case more closely we look at what…

"THE DOG ATE MY COURTWORK": REASONS, EXCUSES AND EXPLANATIONS IN APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

“THE DOG ATE MY COURTWORK”: REASONS, EXCUSES AND EXPLANATIONS IN APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

June 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Relief from sanctions

 One thing that the the Denton decision did, without doubt*, was to put an end to the “mandatory” requirement for a “good reason” to explain a breach when applying for relief from sanctions.   However it is always incumbent upon…

NO PLAYING OF THE ADVANTAGE RULE IN CIVIL LITIGATION: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS LEAD TO CLAIMANT'S CASE BEING SENT OFF: GOOD TRY BUT NO TRIAL

NO PLAYING OF THE ADVANTAGE RULE IN CIVIL LITIGATION: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS LEAD TO CLAIMANT’S CASE BEING SENT OFF: GOOD TRY BUT NO TRIAL

June 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements

In Gladwin -v- Bogescu [2017] EWHC 1287 (QB) Mr Justice Turner uses the English language to its full effect when ruling that a claimant who served a witness statement late should not have been granted relief from sanctions. The case…

DELAY, DENTON, APPEALS AND CROSS-APPEALS: EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

DELAY, DENTON, APPEALS AND CROSS-APPEALS: EXTENSION OF TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

April 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Relief from sanctions

In Pinisetty -v-Manikonda [2017] EWHC 838 (QB) Mr Justice Langstaff considered an issue relating to an appeal (and cross-appeal)  being out of time. Although the judgment on this issue is largely academic (the appeal failed in any event), it contains…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A "SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS" PUT RIGHT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A “SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS” PUT RIGHT

April 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Relief from sanctions

There may well be a term for the process by which a number of decisions, which appeared sensible at the time they were made, lead to a ridiculous result. This principle may well apply to what happened in Falmouth House…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AND  GRANTS RELIEF WHEN THE ORIGINAL ORDER WAS PRE-DENTON

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWS APPEAL AND GRANTS RELIEF WHEN THE ORIGINAL ORDER WAS PRE-DENTON

March 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

It is surprising, perhaps embarrassing, that the Court of Appeal is still hearing appeals where the judge at first instance applied the pre-Denton approach to relief from sanctions. However a judgment today involved just that*.  In Patterson -v- Spencer [2017]…

1 2 … 12 Next →

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2019. 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 18,051 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 8: SURVIVING CHRISTMAS
  • APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE
  • CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE
  • RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING
  • 2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (6): WHY WE STILL FRET OVER EXPERTS …

Top Posts & Pages

  • STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 8: SURVIVING CHRISTMAS
  • APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT'S UPHILL STRUGGLE
  • CORRECT INTEREST RATE ON COSTS WHEN CLAIMANT BEATS THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER: TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO AWARD 10% OVER BASE
  • RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING
  • THE LEGAL CHRISTMAS MUSIC CONTEST 2019: A RUNNING ACCOUNT OF THE CONTESTANTS

Blogroll

  • 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

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies.
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2019 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin