Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Personal Injury
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE "MAN OF STRAW" IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT'S HOME INSURANCE

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE DEFENDANT IS NOT WORTH SUING? AN EFFECTIVE REMEDY AGAINST THE “MAN OF STRAW” IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: A REMINDER TO LOOK AT YOUR OWN CLIENT’S HOME INSURANCE

January 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Enforcement, Members Content, Personal Injury

A perennial problem for litigators is the situation where a claimant has a good case but the Defendant is impecunious and uninsured.  In many (but not all) motor claims the Motor Insurers Bureau will provide a practical remedy. In all…

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE?  PLUS - THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS...

PART 36 IN THE COURT OF APPEAL TODAY: DIGGING DEEPER 3: SO WHY DID THE CLAIMANT LOSE? PLUS – THE STING IN THE TAIL FOR DEFENDANTS…

January 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

Earlier posts have shown that the claimant was successful on two of the key issues in relation to the appeal.  However litigation can be cruel. A litigant can win on many issues but still lose the case. So it is…

INTEREST RATE DECREASED ON THE COURT FUNDS OFFICE SPECIAL AND BASIC ACCOUNTS: THE AMOUNTS AND A REMINDER OF A USEFUL ONLINE TOOL

INTEREST RATE DECREASED ON THE COURT FUNDS OFFICE SPECIAL AND BASIC ACCOUNTS: THE AMOUNTS AND A REMINDER OF A USEFUL ONLINE TOOL

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Interest, Members Content, Personal Injury

The interest rates payable on Court Fund accounts have decreased. THE CHANGES The changes are announced here. They took effect on the 9th January 2026.   Special Account – decreased from 4.00% to 3.75% Basic Account – decreased from 3.00%…

COST BITES 314: PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN THE RTA PROTOCOL: CLAIMANT LIMITED TO FIXED COSTS

COST BITES 314: PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT IN THE RTA PROTOCOL: CLAIMANT LIMITED TO FIXED COSTS

December 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is the second case today that was sent in by a helpful reader.  I am grateful to Ben Millns from Kennedys  who has sent me a copy of this judgment. It relates to the question of whether a personal…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 42:  THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A "NON-ADMISSION" AND A "DENIAL": DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE CASE WAS PLEADED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 42: THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A “DENIAL”: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE CASE WAS PLEADED

December 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case

This is the first of two interesting cases today that have been sent in by readers. I am grateful to  Rebecca McVety of the Dental Law Partnership for sending me this judgment which deals with pleadings, in particular the very…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 41: HAD THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY?

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 41: HAD THE DEFENDANT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY?

December 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case

A party alleging fraud or dishonesty cannot “ambush” their opponent at trial.  Fraud must be fully particularised and pleaded.  Do identical principles apply to allegations of fundamental dishonesty?   In this case the judge considered an argument that points in relation…

EXPERT WATCH 27 : WHAT DOES THE COURT DO WHEN AN EXPERT'S EXAMINATION HAS BEEN COVERTLY RECORDED? "I HOPE HE WILL NEVER DO IT AGAIN..."

EXPERT WATCH 27 : WHAT DOES THE COURT DO WHEN AN EXPERT’S EXAMINATION HAS BEEN COVERTLY RECORDED? “I HOPE HE WILL NEVER DO IT AGAIN…”

November 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

Covert recordings, of one type or another, are featuring heavily on this blog today.  Here we consider a case where a claimant secretly recorded her examination by an expert instructed by the defendant. The claimant then applied to admit the…

COST BITES 312: A CHANCE TO SEE COSTS BUDGETING IN ACTION: A CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED AND THE CLAIMANT IS A PROTECTED PARTY

COST BITES 312: A CHANCE TO SEE COSTS BUDGETING IN ACTION: A CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY IS ALLEGED AND THE CLAIMANT IS A PROTECTED PARTY

November 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

It is always interesting to read  detailed decisions about costs budgeting.  They are few and far between. We have a full judgment here where the Master deals with issues such as hourly rates, the impact of allegations of dishonesty and…

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND ACCIDENTS AT WORK: WEBINAR 1ST DECEMBER 2025: CRITICISM USING HINDSIGHT IS EASY BUT DOES NOT NECESSARILY LEAD TO FINDINGS AGAINST A CLAIMANT

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND ACCIDENTS AT WORK: WEBINAR 1ST DECEMBER 2025: CRITICISM USING HINDSIGHT IS EASY BUT DOES NOT NECESSARILY LEAD TO FINDINGS AGAINST A CLAIMANT

November 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Personal Injury, Webinar

This webinar explores the complex area of contributory negligence in employer’s liability cases. It examines how courts approach allegations that an employee’s actions contributed to their own injury, drawing on key case law to illustrate judicial reasoning. Delegates will gain…

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE IN ROAD TRAFFIC CASES: DO ALL ROADS LEAD TO FROOM? WEBINAR 19th NOVEMBER 2025

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE IN ROAD TRAFFIC CASES: DO ALL ROADS LEAD TO FROOM? WEBINAR 19th NOVEMBER 2025

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Damages, Personal Injury, Webinar, Witness statements

Issues relating to contributory negligence often play a large part in road traffic cases.  This webinar looks at the case law and guidance in relation to the key issues that often arise. Booking details are available here. (A failure to wear…

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE LAW, PRACTICE AND SPECIAL CASES: WEBINAR 17th NOVEMBER 2025

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: THE LAW, PRACTICE AND SPECIAL CASES: WEBINAR 17th NOVEMBER 2025

November 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Personal Injury

You may be reading this for the second time – but it may be partly your own fault.…  This webinar looks at the law relating to contributory negligence, the legislation and the key cases.  Booking details are available here.  …

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (3): ARE THE CPR PROVISIONS RELATING TO VULNERABILITY RELEVANT? WHOSE JOB IS IT TO CONSIDER THEM IN THIS CONTEXT?

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Part 36

We are looking again at the case in which the claimant applied for permission to withdraw their Part 36 offer.  The claimant had capacity, however at the hearing it was argued that he came within the definition of “vulnerable” litigant…

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (2): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

SHOULD A CLAIMANT BE GIVEN PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW THEIR OWN PART 36 OFFER? (2): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Part 36

We continue with the consideration of the recent case in which a claimant applied for permission to withdraw a Part 36 offer.  The judge also considered the relevant rules and case law in detail. (You need the court’s permission to…

OCCUPIER'S LIABILITY CASES IN THE COURTS: A PRACTICAL APPROACH: WEBINAR 29th OCTOBER 2025

OCCUPIER’S LIABILITY CASES IN THE COURTS: A PRACTICAL APPROACH: WEBINAR 29th OCTOBER 2025

October 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Personal Injury, Webinar, Witness statements

This webinar looks at how the courts are dealing with occupiers liability cases and the duty of care.  It takes a practical look at they way in which cases are decided and the factors which determine whether liability is established…

COST BITES 298: SHOULD THE DEFENDANT PAY ALL THE COSTS WHEN THE CLAIMANT DISCONTINUED AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS

COST BITES 298: SHOULD THE DEFENDANT PAY ALL THE COSTS WHEN THE CLAIMANT DISCONTINUED AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS

October 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking here at an issue relating to a defendant’s liability to pay the costs of other defendants against whom no order for costs was made.  Was the “paying” defendant also liable to pay the costs that the claimant…

SHOULD COSTS BE DISAPPLIED IN A "MIXED" CASE WHERE PART OF A CLAIM HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT? A DECISION ON APPEAL

SHOULD COSTS BE DISAPPLIED IN A “MIXED” CASE WHERE PART OF A CLAIM HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT? A DECISION ON APPEAL

October 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

What order  for costs should the court make in a “mixed” claim when part of the claim is struck out but a personal injury claim continues. That was the question considered in the appeal we are looking at here. In…

EXPERT WATCH 21: THE EXPERT WHO FAILED TO CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE  IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL AND "WHO WAS NOT PARTICULARLY OPEN TO RECONSIDERING HIS OPINION"

EXPERT WATCH 21: THE EXPERT WHO FAILED TO CONSIDER NEW EVIDENCE IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL AND “WHO WAS NOT PARTICULARLY OPEN TO RECONSIDERING HIS OPINION”

October 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

Here we look at a judgment about medical evidence in a personal injury action. The issue was one of causation – whether an earlier injury to the claimant’s leg “caused” a later decision to have that leg amputated.  The critique…

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: "THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT"

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: “THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT”

October 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is the most  serious criticism of surveillance operatives as I have seen.  The judge found that the operatives, filming on behalf of a defendant for the purpose of litigation,  had been “fundamental and repeated” errors. The operatives then put…

COST BITES 294: "A DETAILED ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE FORUM TO RESCUE OR TO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE EFFECT OF A POORLY WORDED ORDER": THE COURT WOULD NOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF POTENTIAL FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTYOF THE PRIMARY ACTION ON ASSESSMENT

COST BITES 294: “A DETAILED ASSESSMENT IS NOT THE FORUM TO RESCUE OR TO ATTEMPT TO CHANGE THE EFFECT OF A POORLY WORDED ORDER”: THE COURT WOULD NOT CONSIDER ASSERTIONS OF POTENTIAL FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTYOF THE PRIMARY ACTION ON ASSESSMENT

September 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Uncategorized

Here we are looking at an attempt by a paying party defendant to raise issues of conduct, including potential fundamental dishonesty, at the assessment of costs stage.  The defendant argued (or attempted to argue) that the costs judge should take…

EXPERT WATCH 14: THERE WERE "TOO MANY IMPONDERABLES" TO FORM A VIEW THAT THE INJURIES WOULD HAVE BEEN REDUCED IF A CAR HAD BEEN DRIVEN AT A LOWER SPEED

EXPERT WATCH 14: THERE WERE “TOO MANY IMPONDERABLES” TO FORM A VIEW THAT THE INJURIES WOULD HAVE BEEN REDUCED IF A CAR HAD BEEN DRIVEN AT A LOWER SPEED

September 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judge in this case considered whether the medical evidence established that driving at a lower speed would have “significantly reduced” the injuries that the claimant suffered.  This is often a difficult matter to prove.   (The evidence on whether…

MEMBER NEWS: "ON DEMAND" CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINARS AVAILABLE TO WATCH AT A TIME AND PLACE TO SUIT YOU: WITH DISCOUNTS FOR CLB MEMBERS

MEMBER NEWS: “ON DEMAND” CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF WEBINARS AVAILABLE TO WATCH AT A TIME AND PLACE TO SUIT YOU: WITH DISCOUNTS FOR CLB MEMBERS

September 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Limitation, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Webinar, Witness statements

Last week we looked at webinars coming up which may be of interest to CLB readers.  CLB members can obtain a discount on these webinars.  The same discount applies to webinars which are now available “on demand”.  These webinars are…

LIABILITY FOR ACCIDENTS INVOLVING OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES: WEBINAR 3rd SEPTEMBER 2025

LIABILITY FOR ACCIDENTS INVOLVING OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES: WEBINAR 3rd SEPTEMBER 2025

August 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Personal Injury, Webinar

As recent events have shown the consequences of inadequate training, supervision and knowledge of those responsible for running outdoor activities can lead to major injuries and fatalities.  The webinar looks at the case law, statutes and general guidance in relation…

EXPERT WATCH 11: EXPERT ASSERTS THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS MALINGERING BUT WOULDN'T TELL THE COURT ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THE TESTS THAT LED TO THAT CONCLUSION

EXPERT WATCH 11: EXPERT ASSERTS THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS MALINGERING BUT WOULDN’T TELL THE COURT ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THE TESTS THAT LED TO THAT CONCLUSION

August 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

We have seen some unusual conduct of experts on this site.  However the case we look at today has elements that we have not looked at before.  An expert carried out tests on the claimant and, as a result of…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2025 (1): LIMITATION IN PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS - HOW DOES ANYONE MISS A THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2025 (1): LIMITATION IN PERSONAL INJURY CLAIMS – HOW DOES ANYONE MISS A THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

August 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

In an ideal world all personal injury limitation periods would be three years, and all other action six.  However we do not live in an ideal world.  The first, and most obvious, place to look at avoiding negligence claims is…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 10: WAS THIS CLAIM STATUTE BARRED?IF SO SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980?

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 10: WAS THIS CLAIM STATUTE BARRED?IF SO SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER SECTION 33 OF THE LIMITATION ACT 1980?

August 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

Here we look at a decision in relation to limitation. The trial judge had to determine whether the claimant’s action was statute barred. If it was she then had to consider whether it was appropriate to exercise the court’s discretion…

EXPERT WATCH 10: CLAIMANT UNSUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN ATTEMPTING TO OVERTURN THE TRIAL JUDGE'S PREFERENCE FOR THE DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS: "THE IRREDUCIBLE FACT IS IS THAT THE JUDGE ACCEPTED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF THE RESPONDENT'S KEY WITNESS AND PREFERRED TO OVER THE EVIDENCE OF THE APPELLANT'S KEY EXPERT WITNESS"

EXPERT WATCH 10: CLAIMANT UNSUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN ATTEMPTING TO OVERTURN THE TRIAL JUDGE’S PREFERENCE FOR THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: “THE IRREDUCIBLE FACT IS IS THAT THE JUDGE ACCEPTED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF THE RESPONDENT’S KEY WITNESS AND PREFERRED TO OVER THE EVIDENCE OF THE APPELLANT’S KEY EXPERT WITNESS”

August 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Personal Injury

There are relatively few cases where a party appeals on the basis that trial judge was wrong to accept the evidence of one party’s expert witness in preference to the other.  There are even fewer cases where such an appeal…

COST BITES 266: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AFTER A LINE BY LINE ASSESSMENT? A WORKING EXAMPLE

COST BITES 266: WHAT DOES THE COURT DO IF THE COSTS ARE DISPROPORTIONAL AFTER A LINE BY LINE ASSESSMENT? A WORKING EXAMPLE

August 6, 2025 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, Proportionality

Here we look at a judgment relation to proportionality and the assessment of costs.   The claimant’s costs had been substantially reduced after a three day assessment but the judge found that the total sum was still disproportional.  The judge could…

EXPERT WATCH 8: "SCIENCE DOES NOT CHANGE" : EVIDENCE THAT WAS "UNIMPRESSIVE IN PARTS AND OF LITTLE ASSISTANCE TO THE COURT"

EXPERT WATCH 8: “SCIENCE DOES NOT CHANGE” : EVIDENCE THAT WAS “UNIMPRESSIVE IN PARTS AND OF LITTLE ASSISTANCE TO THE COURT”

August 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

To end the week I am looking at another decision about expert witnesses (it has been a theme this week). This time  we are looking at accident reconstruction experts.  One expert was found wanting, the judge favoured the other.  The…

EXPERT WATCH 5: AN EXPERT SHOULD DISCLOSE PREVIOUS CRITICISMS MADE BY JUDGES: PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN WARNED ABOUT THIS BEFORE…

July 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have seen a trend in a number of recent cases of advocates cross examining experts and referring to judicial criticism made in previous cases that experts have been involved in. The judgment here goes one further and indicates that…

COST BITES 262: THE CLAIMANTS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ORDERED TO PAY COSTS IN A "MIXED" CLAIM AGAINST THE POLICE

COST BITES 262: THE CLAIMANTS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ORDERED TO PAY COSTS IN A “MIXED” CLAIM AGAINST THE POLICE

July 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, QOCS

Here we are looking at issues relating to costs in an action that included a claim for personal injury but also included other elements. The question the appellate judge had to decide was whether the trial judge had applied the…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 2: OVER TWO WEEKS IN COURT, A PANOPALY OF EXPERTS – BUT THE CASE CAME DOWN TO “WHO SAID WHAT TO WHO?”

July 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

The principles relating to clinical negligence cases are well known. The major problem is usually determining the facts. In cases that involve a disputed recollection of what was said and asked in medical consultations this gives rise to major issues. …

A DEFENDANTS' FIRM OF SOLICITORS COULD LAWFULLY GIVE DETAILS OF CLAIMANTS IN SIMILAR CASES WHEN DEFENDING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY CLAIMS

A DEFENDANTS’ FIRM OF SOLICITORS COULD LAWFULLY GIVE DETAILS OF CLAIMANTS IN SIMILAR CASES WHEN DEFENDING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY CLAIMS

July 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

Here we are looking at a case where claimants brought an action claiming that their data protection rights had been breached by a defendant firm of solicitors. The defendant had collated a list of claimants who had relied on a…

AN INTRODUCTION TO LAW AND PRACTICE IN THE CORONER'S COURT: WEBINAR 17th JULY 2025

AN INTRODUCTION TO LAW AND PRACTICE IN THE CORONER’S COURT: WEBINAR 17th JULY 2025

July 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Fatal Accidents, Webinar

Representing people at a Coroner’s hearing gives rise to major challenges and responsibilities.  Ensuring that the concerns of the participants are fully considered whilst recognising the limited role that the coroner has.  This webinar  is an introduction to the role…

DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH AND DAMAGES FOR LOSSES PRIOR TO DEATH: WEBINAR 15th JULY 2025

DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH AND DAMAGES FOR LOSSES PRIOR TO DEATH: WEBINAR 15th JULY 2025

July 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Fatal Accidents, Personal Injury, Webinar

This webinar deals with some of the most sensitive and difficult issues that a litigator may have to deal with.  It looks a law and practice relating to losses incurred prior to death.  Booking details are available here. ISSUES COVERED…

COST BITES 250: SHOULD THE CLAIMANT'S SOLICITOR BE ENTITLED TO RECOVER A FULL SUCCESS FEE AND THE ATE PREMIUM? A DECISION MADE ON APPEAL

COST BITES 250: SHOULD THE CLAIMANT’S SOLICITOR BE ENTITLED TO RECOVER A FULL SUCCESS FEE AND THE ATE PREMIUM? A DECISION MADE ON APPEAL

July 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Insurance premiums, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking at a decision made on appeal in relation to the very common issue of the percentage of a success fee and the taking out, and subsequent deduction from damages, of an After the Event Insurance policy.  The…

THE KEY CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES 2025: WEBINAR 3rd JULY 2025

THE KEY CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES 2025: WEBINAR 3rd JULY 2025

June 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Damages, Fatal Accidents, Personal Injury, Webinar

In a recent case the court observed the importance of working from the established cases when considering how fatal accident damages should be assesessed.  When allowing an appeal from an “unconventional” means of assessment by the trial judge it was…

HOW SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION TO CASE MANAGE ACTIONS ONCE PART 8 PROCEEDINGS ARE ISSUED UNDER THE PAP? COURT OF APPEAL GIVES CLEAR GUIDANCE

HOW SHOULD THE COURT EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION TO CASE MANAGE ACTIONS ONCE PART 8 PROCEEDINGS ARE ISSUED UNDER THE PAP? COURT OF APPEAL GIVES CLEAR GUIDANCE

June 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Personal Injury

Having determined that the court does have jurisdiction to case manage actions issued under Part 8 the Court of Appeal went on to make some trenchant observations in relation to avoiding the possibility of delay. (Applications to extend a stay…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 1: ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: IT HELPS IF THE PSLA IS IN THE SCHEDULE

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 1: ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: IT HELPS IF THE PSLA IS IN THE SCHEDULE

June 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Professional negligence,

It is relatively rare for litigators to get a detailed insight into the court’s approach to an award for pain and suffering.  We see any example here. Of course every case is fact specific, but practitioners have to be aware…

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE CONSIDERED: CASES IN THE COURTS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS: WEBINAR 1ST JULY 2025

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE CONSIDERED: CASES IN THE COURTS IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS: WEBINAR 1ST JULY 2025

June 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Personal Injury, Webinar

It is commonplace for defendants to make allegations of contributory negligence against an injured claimant.  Litigators working in this field need to know the basic law and principles relating to contributory negligence and also how these are being applied in…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 9 : COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDER ISSUES OF LIABILITY FOR INJURIES CAUSED IN A RUGBY MATCH: WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE LEGAL TEST?

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 9 : COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDER ISSUES OF LIABILITY FOR INJURIES CAUSED IN A RUGBY MATCH: WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE LEGAL TEST?

June 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

There are relatively few cases in which the Court of Appeal looks at civil claims for injuries caused in the course of sporting activity. We are looking at such a case here.  The Court addresses the question of what standard…

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHO HAD PURSUED A "HOPELESS" CASE: ATTEMPTS TO RELY ON PRIVILEGE WERE A RESORT TO A MERE "FIG LEAF"

WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHO HAD PURSUED A “HOPELESS” CASE: ATTEMPTS TO RELY ON PRIVILEGE WERE A RESORT TO A MERE “FIG LEAF”

June 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury, Wasted Costs, Witness statements

It is rare for a wasted costs order to be made against a solicitor for pursuing what is seen as a “hopeless” case.  However we have such an order in the case we are considering here.  The Master found the…

THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON THE LIABILITY OF CREDIT HIRE COMPANIES TO PAY COSTS: THE SPECIFIC CASES EXAMINED

THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON THE LIABILITY OF CREDIT HIRE COMPANIES TO PAY COSTS: THE SPECIFIC CASES EXAMINED

June 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Members Content

This is the second post about the Court of Appeal judgment today in relation to the liability of credit hire companies to pay costs. Here we look at the decisions made in relation to each of the two cases under…

PREPARING A SCHEDULE AND PROVIDING EVIDENCE IN A FATAL CLAIM 2025: WEBINAR 18th JUNE 2025

PREPARING A SCHEDULE AND PROVIDING EVIDENCE IN A FATAL CLAIM 2025: WEBINAR 18th JUNE 2025

June 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Damages, Fatal Accidents, Personal Injury, Webinar

It is a difficult task to summarise the value of a life in one document. This is what happens when a schedule is drafted in a fatal claim.  It is a task that has to be done carefully and with…

WHAT COSTS REGIME APPLIES WHERE A JUDGE FINDS THAT A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE USED THE LOW VALUE PERSONAL INJURY PORTAL? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED ON APPEAL

WHAT COSTS REGIME APPLIES WHERE A JUDGE FINDS THAT A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE USED THE LOW VALUE PERSONAL INJURY PORTAL? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED ON APPEAL

June 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

For the second time this week we are looking at the issue of whether, or not, it was reasonable for a claimant’s solicitor to conclude that a matter should have been commenced outside the Low Value Personal Injury Portal.  This…

UNDERSTANDING THE LAW AS TO FATAL ACCIDENTS 2025: WEBINAR 11th JUNE 2025

UNDERSTANDING THE LAW AS TO FATAL ACCIDENTS 2025: WEBINAR 11th JUNE 2025

June 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Damages, Fatal Accidents, Webinar

Part of a series on fatal accident litigation this webinar takes you through the essential elements you have to consider before you can advise whether a claim for fatal accident damages can be brought. Booking details available here   WHAT THE…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, FORGED DOCUMENTS AND A FINDING OF CONTEMPT OF COURT: A WHOLE BUNCH OF PROBLEMS

WITNESS STATEMENTS, FORGED DOCUMENTS AND A FINDING OF CONTEMPT OF COURT: A WHOLE BUNCH OF PROBLEMS

June 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is a case where the judge found that the claimant and a witness relied on documents that they knew to be forged. It is an important reminder of the lengths that some people can go to in litigation.  It…

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 7: THE COUNCIL WAS LIABLE FOR THE STATE OF AN UNADOPTED HIGHWAY: A FINDING FOR THE CLAIMANT WAS NOT A BRIDGE TOO FAR

PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 7: THE COUNCIL WAS LIABLE FOR THE STATE OF AN UNADOPTED HIGHWAY: A FINDING FOR THE CLAIMANT WAS NOT A BRIDGE TOO FAR

June 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Personal Injury

The issues of an occupier’s duty in relation to those walking along unadopted highways are always complex.  Here we look at a case where the claimant was successful in establishing a breach of duty following an injury she sustained when…

DOES EVERY DOG DESERVE ONE BITE? LIABILITY FOR ANIMALS - RECENT CASES CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 6th JUNE 2025

DOES EVERY DOG DESERVE ONE BITE? LIABILITY FOR ANIMALS – RECENT CASES CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 6th JUNE 2025

June 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Liability, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

It is difficult to find anyone who has a good word to say about Section 2 of  the Animals Act, this webinar looks at recent cases relating to liability for animals and the practical steps litigators can take when considering…

PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES 2025: WEBINAR 4th JUNE 2025

PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES 2025: WEBINAR 4th JUNE 2025

May 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

This webinar looks at recent cases in relation to periodical payments and periodical payments, including an interesting negligence case brought against solicitors who failed to claim provisional damages. Booking details are available here.      It then looks at the…

THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO GRANT THE DEFENDANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A "MINI TRIAL"

THE JUDGE WAS WRONG TO GRANT THE DEFENDANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN A PERSONAL INJURY CASE: THIS SHOULD NOT BE A “MINI TRIAL”

May 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Summary judgment, Witness statements

Today we are looking at a case where the claimants were successful on appeal in overturning an order granting the defendant summary judgment.  The case shows the limits of applications for summary judgment, in particular arguments that evidence was not…

1 2 … 8 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXPERT WATCH 31: A PARTY WAS NOT ALLOWED TO RELY ON THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF SOMEONE WHO WAS CONFLICTED: THE EXPERT CANNOT “MARK THEIR OWN HOMEWORK”
  • COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR’S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION
  • COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT’S HAD AN “ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION”
  • IT IS NOT THE JUDGE’S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED
  • COST BITES 337: CLAIMANT FAILS IN ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE “SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES” UNDER THE SOLICITORS ACT

Top Posts

  • COST BITES 338: COURT AWARDS THE DEFENDANT INDEMNITY COSTS: THE CLAIMANT'S HAD AN "ENTIRELY, UNREASONABLE AND ALMOST IRRATIONAL APPROACH TO THIS LITIGATION"
  • IT IS NOT THE JUDGE'S JOB TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO THE ORDER: THE APPLICANT SHOULD ASK: PENAL NOTICES CONSIDERED
  • COST BITES 339: SOLICITOR'S ATTEMPT TO OVERTURN A DECISION OF THE LEGAL OMBUDSMAN WAS UNSUCCESSFUL: IT WAS ENTITLED TO ORDER REPAYMENT OF ALL THE FEES IN ADDITION TO £50,000 COMPENSATION
  • EXPERT WATCH 31: A PARTY WAS NOT ALLOWED TO RELY ON THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF SOMEONE WHO WAS CONFLICTED: THE EXPERT CANNOT "MARK THEIR OWN HOMEWORK"
  • PROVING THINGS 276: APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS TRIAL JUDGE'S "INFERENCES" OF LOSS: DAMAGES AWARD OF £347,285 REPLACED WITH £NIL

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.