Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Personal Injury » Page 8
ASSESSING DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WHEN THE JUDGES GO "BACK TO BASICS" (AND WHY IT MATTERS)

ASSESSING DAMAGES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: WHEN THE JUDGES GO “BACK TO BASICS” (AND WHY IT MATTERS)

May 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am giving a webinar on Thursday on “The Fundamentals of Personal Injury Damage”.   The starting point is the “basic” element of personal injury damages – to put the claimant back in the position they would be if they had…

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2020

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF PERSONAL INJURY DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2020

April 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am giving a webinar on the 7th May 2020 – 12.00 – 13.00 on the fundamentals of personal injury damages. Many practitioners engage daily in the assessment of personal injury damages without a detailed knowledge of the fundamental principles,…

BOOK REVIEW:  GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS

BOOK REVIEW: GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS

February 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Book Review, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

I have been sent a copy of the 3rd edition of the Guide to Catastrophic Injury Claims by Stuart McKechnie QC and others. I can review it briefly. This is a book that needs to be on your shelf if…

PROVING THINGS 173: FAILING TO PROVE ANY KIND OF PAST OR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS: A BLAMIRE AWARD IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE

PROVING THINGS 173: FAILING TO PROVE ANY KIND OF PAST OR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS: A BLAMIRE AWARD IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR EVIDENCE

January 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

There is another aspect of the judgment of Mr Justice Chamberlain in  BXB v Watch Tower And Bible Tract Society of Pennsylvannia & Anor [2020] EWHC 156 (QB) that merits attention. Th claimant sought damage for loss of earnings  but these…

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: THE AWARD SHOULD BE THE SAME: IT DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER YOU ARE RICH OR POOR

January 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The Privy Council decision in Attorney General of St Helena v AB & Ors (St Helena) [2020] UKPC 1 is of considerable interest to personal injury practitioners. Issues relating to awards made for pain and suffering are rarely discussed at…

63 YEARS OLD AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES - MUNKMAN (& EXALL) ON DAMAGES - THE WRITING PROCESS

63 YEARS OLD AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES – MUNKMAN (& EXALL) ON DAMAGES – THE WRITING PROCESS

January 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

An earlier post looked at the previous 13 editions of Munkman on Damages for Personal Injury and Death, together with photos.   Since more people read law books than write them I thought it would be of interest to describe the…

PERSONAL INJURY CASES WHERE THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND HAS NO ASSETS: LOOK TO THE CLAIMANT'S OWN INSURANCE POLICY

PERSONAL INJURY CASES WHERE THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND HAS NO ASSETS: LOOK TO THE CLAIMANT’S OWN INSURANCE POLICY

January 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Personal Injury

Periodically I repeat the second ever post on this blog.  This related to the (surprising to many) fact that it may be possible for a claimant with an unsatisfied judgment to recover damages from their own domestic insurance policy.  …

63 YEARS ON AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES: MUNKMAN ON DAMAGES - ALBEIT WITH A NEW TITLE (1)

63 YEARS ON AND STILL ROLLING OFF THE PRESSES: MUNKMAN ON DAMAGES – ALBEIT WITH A NEW TITLE (1)

December 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The latest edition of what, used to be called, Munkman on Damages is now hot off the press.  This is the 14th edition, the first being written in 1956.  In this post I look at the history of the book…

APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT'S UPHILL STRUGGLE

APPEALING AWARDS FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: THE APPELLANT’S UPHILL STRUGGLE

December 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The second aspect of the judgment in Essex County Council & Ors v Davies & Ors [2019] EWHC 3443 I want to look at is the defendants’ appeal in relation to damages.  This case reiterates the difficulties (for claimants and defendants)…

FALL DOWN AIRCRAFT STEPS WAS AN "ACCIDENT": HIGH COURT DECISION

FALL DOWN AIRCRAFT STEPS WAS AN “ACCIDENT”: HIGH COURT DECISION

August 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

Several posts last week dealt with claims relating to aircraft and the limitation period. The Montreal Convention was considered in   Labbadia v Alitalia (Societa Aerea Italiana SPA) [2019] EWHC 2103 (QB). (One essential point to take home is that this…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 4: AVIATION, PLANES, AIRPORTS AND BALLOONS: VICIOUS RULES APPLY

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 4: AVIATION, PLANES, AIRPORTS AND BALLOONS: VICIOUS RULES APPLY

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is the fourth in the series. The purpose of this post is to make you feel really uncomfortable when you are involved with a case that involves aviation and personal injury, in any way shape or form. Including when…

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2: HOW DO YOU MISS THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION 2: HOW DO YOU MISS THE THREE YEAR LIMITATION PERIOD?

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

This series looks at avoiding negligence claims in litigation, personal injury litigation in particular.  The easiest (and most common) method of a negligence claim is missing the limitation period. How does anyone miss a three year limitation period?  The basic…

CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2019

CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2019

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Courses, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am giving a webinar on the 10th September 2019: “CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LAW, PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE: PROVE IT OR LOSE IT!” CONTENT The webinar will cover: The law as to loss of earnings How a claim for…

THE ROLE OF THE SOLICITOR IN PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION: IDEAS TAKEN FROM THE SECRET BARRISTER

July 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Advocacy, Members Content, Personal Injury

There was a tweet yesterday from someone (a non-lawyer) asserting that personal injury lawyers did not need to know the law.  His purpose, I suspect, was to lead on to an argument that the work could be done by someone…

BREACH OF REGULATIONS IS IPSO FACTO NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ON s.69 OF THE ERRA

BREACH OF REGULATIONS IS IPSO FACTO NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ON s.69 OF THE ERRA

March 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Colm Nugent for sending me a copy of the judgment of HH Gore QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Tonkins -v- Tapp  (7th December 2018).   The judgment deals with the issue of the relevance…

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 24: THE BANKRUPT CLAIMANT (PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANTS IN PARTICULAR)

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 24: THE BANKRUPT CLAIMANT (PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANTS IN PARTICULAR)

January 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am writing this primarily because of a conversation I had with a law graduate who thought the term “bankruptcy” was a generic term to cover anyone who was hard up. The very basic point about what bankruptcy is, and…

NOT TELLING THE CLAIMANT THE AMOUNT OF HIS DAMAGES: JUDICIAL APPROVAL OBTAINED

NOT TELLING THE CLAIMANT THE AMOUNT OF HIS DAMAGES: JUDICIAL APPROVAL OBTAINED

December 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Personal Injury

In EXB v FDZ & Ors [2018] EWHC 3456 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett had to consider the approach of the court when it was felt to in the claimant’s best interests not to be told of the size of his award…

LIMITATION: COURT DOES NOT EXERCISE SECTION 33 IN CASE CONCERNING ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE: A CAUSE OF ACTION CANNOT BE PUT ON THE SHELF

LIMITATION: COURT DOES NOT EXERCISE SECTION 33 IN CASE CONCERNING ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ABUSE: A CAUSE OF ACTION CANNOT BE PUT ON THE SHELF

August 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is the second post of the day on Section 33.  In Murray v Devenish & Ors (Sons of the Sacred Heart of Jesus) [2018] EWHC 1895 (QB) the claimant was not successful. Mr Justice Nicol held that the claimant’s delay…

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 8: MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION

FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 8: MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION

June 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

This was a series in 2017. Looking at common “myths” or misconceptions in relation to limitation issues, particularly in personal injury cases.     MYTHUSTING 1 The limitation period for a personal injury action based on breach of contract is…

"NOTHING SHORT OF A RECOGNISED PSYCHIATRIC INJURY CAN AMOUNT TO A PERSONAL INJURY": SECTION 33 CANNOT APPLY WHERE THE CLAIMANTS SUFFERED "FEAR"

“NOTHING SHORT OF A RECOGNISED PSYCHIATRIC INJURY CAN AMOUNT TO A PERSONAL INJURY”: SECTION 33 CANNOT APPLY WHERE THE CLAIMANTS SUFFERED “FEAR”

May 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Damages, Limitation, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment of Mr Justice Stewart in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign and Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 1305 (QB) (24 May 2018) considers the question of what is an “injury” for the purpose of Section 33 of the Limitation Act…

BOOK  REVIEW: AN INTRODUCTION TO PERSONAL INJURY LAW

BOOK REVIEW: AN INTRODUCTION TO PERSONAL INJURY LAW

May 25, 2017 · by gexall · in Book Review, Members Content, Personal Injury

I reviewed David Boyle’s book on expert evidence earlier in the year. He has presumably decided to forego all forms of social interaction and has now written a general introduction to Personal Injury.  The book places some emphasis on the…

REVISITING COMPLIANCE WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER AFTER TRIAL: LIES ARE FOUND OUT AND ACTION DISMISSED

March 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Striking out, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Jeff Turton of Weightmans for sending me a copy of the transcript in the case of Anward -v- Severn Trent Water Ltd (13th July 2015).  Abid Anwar – Full Judgment It raises an interesting and important point…

LIMITATION AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE: WHAT IS MEANT BY "SIGNIFICANT"?

November 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Summers -v- The City and County of Cardiff [2015] EWHC 3066 (QB) Mr Justice Hickinbottom considered what was meant by “significant” in s.14(1) of the Limitation Act 1980. “The test for “significance” of injury is one of quantum alone,…

THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SECTION 33: A CASE THAT CLINICAL AND PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYERS PROBABLY NEED TO READ

October 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Rayner -v- Wolferstans & Medway NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2957 (QB) Mr Justice Wilkie carried out a comprehensive review of the law relating to date of knowledge and Section 33 of the Limitation Action 1980.  It also touches…

BANKRUPTCY AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LITIGANT: 10 KEY POINTS

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The post about Eatons -v- Mitchells & Butler PLC led to some interesting discussions and raises some important issues. The claimant had been made bankrupt after he was injured. His lawyers overlooked this, issued proceedings, succeeded in a trial on…

SETTING OFF INTEREST AGAINST AN INTERIM PAYMENT: A HIGH COURT DECISION

August 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mrs Justice Cox in Manna -v- Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 2279 (QB) is a veritable goldmine for anyone who writes about civil procedure or personal injury damages.  One of the, many, issues…

DATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SECTION 33 IN SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: A HIGH COURT DECISION

June 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content

In A -v- The Trustees of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society [2015] EWHC 1722 (QB) Mr Justice Globe considered the issue of the date of knowledge under s.14 of the Limitation Act 1980 and also stated that, had it…

COSTS AFTER VARIATION OF A PART 36 OFFER TO BE LESS ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE RECIPIENT: BURRETT -v- MENCAP CONSIDERED

September 9, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Part 36, Personal Injury

The decision of District Judge Ackroyd in Burreett -v- Mencap Ltd (14th May 2014) was reported on Lawtel earlier this week and is available on Bailli. It contains an important lesson to both defendants and claimants as to costs when…

SECTION 33 AND “LONG TAIL CLAIMS”: CONSTRUCTIVE KNOWLEDGE AND RELEVANCE OF DELAY BETWEEN THE BREACH AND THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE

May 28, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Limitation, Members Content

In Collins -v- Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills & Ors [2014] EWCA Civ 717  the Court of Appeal considered the appropriate legal test  for the date of knowledge and exercise of the section 33 discretion when an…

LIMITATION: THE ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST: BACK TO THE FUTURE AT WORK

May 26, 2014 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content

This is the second “essential checklist” compiled at a recent course held by Zenith Chambers.   In this workshop practitioners (primarily solicitors), of all levels and type of experience, were asked to produce checklists for the “danger” areas of practice….

TEN MYTHS ABOUT LIMITATION THAT EVERY PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATOR SHOULD KNOW.

October 20, 2013 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Risks of litigation

There are a surprising number of “myths” that prevail in personal injury litigation. In particular in relation to limitation. Here, as part of the “avoiding negligence” series we look at 10 of these myths. Myth 1:  In a breach of…

INTERIM PAYMENTS AND THE SERIOUSLY INJURED CLAIMANT: SOMEWHERE TO LIVE OR DOWN AT EELES?

INTERIM PAYMENTS AND THE SERIOUSLY INJURED CLAIMANT: SOMEWHERE TO LIVE OR DOWN AT EELES?

June 24, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

Cases and principles relating to interim payments and accommodation in catastrophic injury cases are considered. Prior to the decision in Cobham Hire Services –v- Eeles [2009] EWCA Civ 204 it was a relatively simple matter to obtain a substantial interim…

← Previous 1 … 7 8

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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXPERT WATCH 44: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EVIDENCE OF ONE EXPERT OVER ANOTHER: IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT…
  • SERVICE POINTS 34: IS SERVICE BY EMAIL IS STILL VALID – IF IT SITS IN THE RECIPIENT’S SPAM BOX?
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE, RECOLLECTION AND CREDIBILITY: AMY WINEHOUSE, HER FRIENDS AND THE ACCURACY OF RECOLLECTION
  • A TRIBUTE TO GILES PEAKER: “NEARLY LEGAL” – AN EXTRAORDINARY MAN WITH EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS
  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT’S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT

Top Posts

  • A TRIBUTE TO GILES PEAKER: "NEARLY LEGAL" - AN EXTRAORDINARY MAN WITH EXTRAORDINARY TALENTS
  • DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLAIMANT'S DAMAGES: A DEDUCTION OF £2,500 REDUCED TO £330: THE WARNING NOTICE FROM THE SRA REITERATED IN A COURT JUDGMENT
  • THERE MAY BE A LOT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING A PARTY: HOWEVER THE CLAIM WAS STILL PRESENTED IN AN "UNFOCUSED" MANNER: A "MOVEABLE FEAST" IS NOT A WISE WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION
  • SERVICE POINTS 34: IS SERVICE BY EMAIL IS STILL VALID - IF IT SITS IN THE RECIPIENT'S SPAM BOX?
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

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.