Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Part 18 Requests
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 92: THE NEED TO PROVIDE PARTICULARS OF SIGNIFICANT ALLEGATIONS: DEFENDANTS' (LARGELY)  SUCCESSFUL REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION NEEDED BEFORE THEY FILED A DEFENCE

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 92: THE NEED TO PROVIDE PARTICULARS OF SIGNIFICANT ALLEGATIONS: DEFENDANTS’ (LARGELY) SUCCESSFUL REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION NEEDED BEFORE THEY FILED A DEFENCE

September 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

Reports relating to requests for further information are relatively rare. In this case the judge considers the defendants’ request in detail.  The claimant was not ordered to answer all of the questions raised. However the judgment does illustrate important issues…

DOES THE HEADING MATTER? IS A PART 18 REQUEST VALID IF IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES?

DOES THE HEADING MATTER? IS A PART 18 REQUEST VALID IF IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES?

June 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

What should the court’s approach be if a party serves a Part 18 request but, for various reasons,  it does not comply with the rules?  The respondent to the request in this case took the point.  The Master had to…

PART 18 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT DAMAGES REFUSED: "NEITHER REASONABLE OR PROPORTIONATE"

PART 18 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT DAMAGES REFUSED: “NEITHER REASONABLE OR PROPORTIONATE”

September 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2019] EWHC 3620 (Ch) Master Kaye refused an application that a party provide further information in relation to damages. “Part 18 requests should be for the purpose of providing further information…

FAILURE TO GIVE ADEQUATE REPLIES TO PART 18 QUESTIONS LEADS TO ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

April 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In his judgment today in Griffith -v- Gourgey [2015] EWHC 1080 (Ch) Mr Justice Simon addressed the issue of whether an action stands struck out if a party gives inadequate replies to Part 18 questions after a peremptory order has…

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 12.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES 456: LET US ALL REMEMBER THAT THE DISPUTE THAT REACHED THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY WAS OVER THE PRINCELY SUM OF £25: “THE CLIENT HAS NEVER HAD ANY REAL ECONOMIC INTEREST IN THE PURSUIT OF THIS COSTLY LITIGATION”
  • COST BITES 455: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY ON WHETHER A CLIENT IS ENTITLED TO RAISE PART 18 QUESTIONS AS TO WHETHER THE SOLICITOR OBTAINED COMMISSION ON AN ATE PREMIUM
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE NEED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM: LITIGATORS HAVE BEEN COMING TO GRIEF ON THIS ISSUE FOR WELL OVER A DECADE (AT LEAST…)
  • COST BITES 454 : INTEREST ON COSTS: A SERIES OF CHECKLISTS AND USEFUL LINKS FOR THE PAYING PARTY
  • COST BITES 453: YOU ARE NOT GETTING A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT JUST BECAUSE YOU ALL WANT ONE: THE BROADBRUSH IS TOO BLUNT A TOOL FOR THIS PROCESS

Top Posts

WHEN CHAT GPT DRAFTED A "SKELETON" ARGUMENT - 300 PAGES AND 132,000 WORDS LONG: THE LITIGANT RETAINS RESPONSIBILITY AND MUST COMPLY WITH THE RULES
SERVICE POINTS 54: THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN TIME: THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON A DEFENDANT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 7.7: THE ACTION BITES THE DUST
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS "HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS": A USEFUL CHECKLIST AND LINKS TO KEEP YOU ON THE STRAIGHT AND NARROW
ADVISING THE CLIENT OF THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: TEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS COUPLED WITH THE RELEVANT LINKS
COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS' APPLICATIONS TO AMEND AND TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS: A SUBMISSION THAT "WELL WE WERE LYING WHEN WE SIGNED THOSE STATEMENTS OF TRUTH" IS NOT A GOOD STARTING PLACE

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.