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 8
CAN YOU CONVERT PART 7 PROCEEDINGS TO PART 8 PROCEEDINGS: THIS REMAINS AN OPEN QUESTION

CAN YOU CONVERT PART 7 PROCEEDINGS TO PART 8 PROCEEDINGS: THIS REMAINS AN OPEN QUESTION

June 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is clear power in the rules to allow the court to transfer actions issued using Part 8 to Part 7.  However there is no express rule allowing transfer the other way.  The issue was considered in this case.  There…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 75:  A CLAIMANT DOES NOT ALWAYS NEED TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR INTEREST: AN INTERESTING POINT... BUT BE VERY WARY...

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 75: A CLAIMANT DOES NOT ALWAYS NEED TO PLEAD A CLAIM FOR INTEREST: AN INTERESTING POINT… BUT BE VERY WARY…

May 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Interest, Members Content, Statements of Case

Here we look at an argument that a claimant was not entitled to interest because it was not pleaded. The judge rejected the argument on two grounds. Firstly that CPR 16 does not apply to Part 8 claims; secondly that…

COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION: YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TAKE PART IN THE HEARING SO WHY SHOULD THE APPLICATION BE GRANTED?

January 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This case illustrates an important point about procedure in Part 8 proceedings. In particular the fact that a defendant who fails to acknowledge service has no right to be heard at any subsequent hearing.  Here the defendant’s application for an…

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 12TH SEPTEMBER 2025 AND THE 1ST OCTOBER 2025 (2): DISPUTING EVIDENCE AND FILING EVIDENCE IN PART 8 PROCEEDINGS

NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 12TH SEPTEMBER 2025 AND THE 1ST OCTOBER 2025 (2): DISPUTING EVIDENCE AND FILING EVIDENCE IN PART 8 PROCEEDINGS

September 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes, Witness statements

Here we look at the latest statutory instrument which makes changes to the rules.  This time a  highly specific rule  making amendments to Part 8 to deal with the filing of evidence where the defendant states it intends to dispute…

SUMMARY JUDGMENT, PART 8 PROCEEDINGS AND THE FILING OF WITNESS EVIDENCE

SUMMARY JUDGMENT, PART 8 PROCEEDINGS AND THE FILING OF WITNESS EVIDENCE

January 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Summary judgment, Witness statements

In Director of Public Prosecutions v Surin [2025] EWHC 10 (KB) Mr Justice Mould considered issues relating to the service of witness evidence by the defendant in the claimant’s application for summary judgment.  The unusual element of this action was…

ANOTHER PART 8 CASE THAT HAS TO GO TO PART 7: THE RISK THAT THE COURT WILL MAKE "ILL-INFORMED DECISIONS THAT WILL NOT FINALLY DISPOSE OF THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES"

ANOTHER PART 8 CASE THAT HAS TO GO TO PART 7: THE RISK THAT THE COURT WILL MAKE “ILL-INFORMED DECISIONS THAT WILL NOT FINALLY DISPOSE OF THE DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PARTIES”

May 1, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In TClarke Contracting Ltd v Bell Build Ltd [2024] EWHC 992 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall decided that an action, commenced under Part 8, must proceed under Part 7. “In my judgment, the proposed use of the Part 8 procedure in…

TRYING TO SQUEEZE A PART 7 CASE INTO A PART 8 APPLICATION: DISPUTES OF FACT MAKE PART 8 UNSUITABLE

TRYING TO SQUEEZE A PART 7 CASE INTO A PART 8 APPLICATION: DISPUTES OF FACT MAKE PART 8 UNSUITABLE

April 19, 2024 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In ISG Retail Ltd v FK Construction Ltd [2024] EWHC 878 (TCC) Neil Moody KC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, considered the question of whether a case was suitable for Part 8 determination.  He decided that there were…

THE COURT FINDS IT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO ORDER A TRANSFER FROM PART 8 TO PART 7

THE COURT FINDS IT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO ORDER A TRANSFER FROM PART 8 TO PART 7

December 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This is a note about a hearing I was involved in today (16th December 2020). A decision by Deputy Master Yoxall.  For various reasons I cannot name the parties, however I have my Instructing Solicitors’ permission to set out the…

PART 8 PROCEDURE USED FOR CLAIM FOR £2.6 MILLION: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF - IS ANYONE SURPRISED?

PART 8 PROCEDURE USED FOR CLAIM FOR £2.6 MILLION: THE CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF – IS ANYONE SURPRISED?

August 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

A common practice has occurred of issuing Part 8 proceedings under the MOJ Protocol and “parking” cases there for an extended period.  This is an extremely dangerous practice.  It is even more dangerous if the case that has been parked…

VERY LATE CHANGE FROM PART 8 TO PART 7: NUANCED CASE MANAGEMENT IN THE TCC

VERY LATE CHANGE FROM PART 8 TO PART 7: NUANCED CASE MANAGEMENT IN THE TCC

October 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content

There is an interesting piece of case management in the judgment of Recorder Andrew Singer QC (sitting as a Judge of the Technology and Construction Court) in Ealing Care Alliance Ltd v London Borough of Ealing [2018] EWHC 2630 (TCC).  …

THE CORRECT FEE ON A PART 8 APPLICATION: DON'T LET THE COURT STAFF MAKE YOU HAND OVER MONEY FOR NOTHING

THE CORRECT FEE ON A PART 8 APPLICATION: DON’T LET THE COURT STAFF MAKE YOU HAND OVER MONEY FOR NOTHING

August 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

A Twitter conversation this morning came up with the old chestnut of court staff informing a solicitor that the court fee to be paid on a Part 8 application for approval was identical to that on a Part 7 claim. …

INAPPROPRIATE USE OF PART 8 PROCEDURE: "AN ENTIRELY UNSATISFACTORY WAY TO PROCEED": HIGH COURT DECISION

INAPPROPRIATE USE OF PART 8 PROCEDURE: “AN ENTIRELY UNSATISFACTORY WAY TO PROCEED”: HIGH COURT DECISION

January 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Victory House General Partner Ltd v RGB P&C Ltd [2018] EWHC 102 (TCC) Miss Joanna Smith QC (sitting as a Deputy) was clear in her view that a claimant had used the Part 8 procedure inappropriately. “In my judgment this…

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

  • CHILDREN AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION 2026: WEBINAR 30th JUNE 2026
  • COST BITES 406: CAN A PARTY RECOVER UNNECESSARY COSTS AS DAMAGES? THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN UNNECESSARY SECOND ACTION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • THE WEBINAR ON THE SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: WHAT LITIGATION FIRMS NEED TO KNOW: TOGETHER WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS AND TEMPLATESNOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • COST BITES 405: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT LEAD TO A DEDUCTION OF 45% OF THEIR COSTS? A TOOTH DECISION…
  • SHOULD THE COURT ALLOW A “NEWLY APPOINTED” EMPLOYEE TO REPRESENT A LIMITED COMPANY AT A HEARING?

Top Posts

NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES' COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
A NEW SERIES OF USEFUL ONLINE CALCULATORS FOR LITIGATORS AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION (WITH A 20% DISCOUNT FOR CLB READERS): MAKING IT ALL ADD UP
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT: HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS: KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
COST BITES 404: JUDGE ORDERS DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: PARTIES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH THE PROCESS OF LITIGATION: "THEY SHOULD BE USING NON-COURT BASED DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHEREVER POSSIBLE"
THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS A JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION IN FAVOUR OF A SOLICITOR: THE OMBUDSMAN GOT NOTHING WRONG (QUITE A LOT HERE ABOUT VULNERABLE CLIENTS AS WELL...)

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.