Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » Pre-action disclosure
APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE AGAINST A GOLF CLUB GETS A FAIRWAY: THERE MAY BE NO NEED TO TEE OFF: THIS COULD WELL AVOID PROCEEDINGS

APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE AGAINST A GOLF CLUB GETS A FAIRWAY: THERE MAY BE NO NEED TO TEE OFF: THIS COULD WELL AVOID PROCEEDINGS

December 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

In Dennis & Ors v Queenwood Golf Club Ltd [2024] EWHC 3191 (Ch) Mr Justice Miles granted pre-action disclosure of some of the documents sought by the claimants.  What is noticeable in the judgment in the judge’s view that early…

INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT... IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT… IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

April 5, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Baker in Holt v Allianz Insurance Plc [2023] EWHC 790 (KB) is another round in a long running battle between car hire companies and insurers.  Whilst the insurer may have lost this round it is…

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE: THEY "SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO MAKE THE DISCLOSURE APPLICATION IN THE FIRST PLACE"

CLAIMANT SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN APPLICATION FOR NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE: THEY “SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD TO MAKE THE DISCLOSURE APPLICATION IN THE FIRST PLACE”

May 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Disclosure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In Sparkes v London Pension Funds Authority & Anor [2021] EWHC 1265 (QB) Mr Justice Murray allowed an appeal and made an order for non-party disclosure in favour of a claimant.  There are few appellate decisions in relation to non-party…

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: CONDUCT, DISCRETION AND THE "FISHING EXPEDITION" ANALOGY MAY NOT BE A GOOD ONE

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: CONDUCT, DISCRETION AND THE “FISHING EXPEDITION” ANALOGY MAY NOT BE A GOOD ONE

May 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

It is relatively rare for  there to be a High Court judgment on the issue of pre-action disclosure.   In Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd v Harron Homes Ltd [2020] EWHC 1190 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser had some interesting observations on the…

THE COSTS OF PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: IS IT WORTH THE RISK? £40,000 SPENT IN COSTS FOR DOCUMENTS THAT WERE AVAILABLE UNDER GDPR

THE COSTS OF PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: IS IT WORTH THE RISK? £40,000 SPENT IN COSTS FOR DOCUMENTS THAT WERE AVAILABLE UNDER GDPR

February 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Summary assessment,

I am looking again at the decision in  Hussain v Medical Defence Union & Anor [2020] EWHC 157 (QB). This time I am looking at the order in relation to costs.  The application cost in excess of £40,000 in relation to…

APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT'S DISCRETION EXERCISED AGAINST THE APPLICANT

APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT’S DISCRETION EXERCISED AGAINST THE APPLICANT

February 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Disclosure, Members Content

In Hussain v Medical Defence Union & Anor [2020] EWHC 157 (QB) Clive Sheldon QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application for pre-action disclosure.  This judgment makes it clear that pre-action disclosure is, ultimately, a matter of…

DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE REFUSED: AN ORDER WOULD NOT SAVE COSTS OR ASSIST THE DISPUTE TO BE RESOLVED WITHOUT PROCEEDINGS

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE REFUSED: AN ORDER WOULD NOT SAVE COSTS OR ASSIST THE DISPUTE TO BE RESOLVED WITHOUT PROCEEDINGS

January 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content

In Lacey v Leonard [2018] EWHC 3528 (QB) Mrs Justice Slade DBE upheld a decision refusing the defendant’s application for pre-action disclosure.  The primary ground for refusal was that disclosure of medical records, and various documents relating to employment, would not…

SUCCESSFUL PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS: CLAIMANTS HAD TO GIVE INFORMATION AS TO IMPECUNIOSITY

SUCCESSFUL PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION BY DEFENDANTS: CLAIMANTS HAD TO GIVE INFORMATION AS TO IMPECUNIOSITY

October 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content

In EUI Ltd v Charles & Ors [2018] EW Misc B7 (CC) HHJ Robert Harrison made an order that claimants give pre-action disclosure of documents relevant to the issue of impecuniosity.  The practical consequences of this decision could be enormous.  Given…

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: NOT GRANTED WHEN THE PURPOSE WAS TO SEEK DETAILS OF DEFENDANT'S INSURANCE COVER

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: NOT GRANTED WHEN THE PURPOSE WAS TO SEEK DETAILS OF DEFENDANT’S INSURANCE COVER

April 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Disclosure, Members Content

In Peel Port Shareholder Finance Company Ltd-v- Dornoch Ltd [2017] EWHC 876 (TCC) Mr Justice Jefford refused an application for pre-action disclosure of an insurance policy. There is an interesting discussion of the scope of pre-action disclosure and the interrelationship…

FIXED COSTS APPLY TO APPLICATIONS FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

February 1, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Disclosure, Members Content, QOCS

The Court of Appeal judgment today in Sharp -v- Leeds City Council [2017] EWCA Civ 33 deals with an important point about fixed costs and applications for pre-action disclosure. KEY POINTS An application for pre-action disclosure made by a claimant…

HEARING AN APPLICATION FOR PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE AFTER PROCEEDINGS ARE ISSUED: FURTHER DEVELOPMENTS

February 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

An earlier post considered the question whether an application for pre-action disclosure can properly be made after proceedings were issued.  This issue was considered again by HHJ Moloney QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Anglia Research…

THE AMENDED PRE-ACTION PROTOCOLS ARE OUT: THE LINK

April 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Rule Changes

The revised Pre-Action Protocols are now available (3 days after they came into force). THE LINK The Protocols are available on the Justice website and available here.  There are 119 pages. THE AMENDMENTS Amendments are made to 8 of the Protocols….

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE WAS JUSTIFIED AND REASONABLE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

October 9, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In the judgment today in  Jet Airways (India) Ltd -v- Barloworld Handling Ltd [2014] EWCA Civ 1311 the Court of Appeal reiterated the criteria for pre-action disclosure. The Court upheld a decision ordering pre-action disclosure and were extremely firm in…

PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: THE APPROPRIATE TEST CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

December 8, 2013 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Smith –v- Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change [2013] EWCA Civ  1585 the Court of Appeal stress that applications for pre-action disclosure should not become “mini trials” and set out the appropriate test for the courts to consider….

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 35.2K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • AI USED IN THE WRITING OF A JUDICIAL DECISION: READ ALL ABOUT IT…
  • ISSUING AN INJUNCTION MEANS “PROCEEDINGS” ARE UNDERWAY AND THE CLAIMANT HAS TO PAY THE COSTS AFTER IT WAS SET ASIDE: ALLOWING THE CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS IN THIS APPEAL WOULD BE AN “AFFRONT TO COMMONSENSE”
  • UPDATED VERSION OF THE CHANCERY GUIDE: A USEFUL LINK
  • EXPERT WATCH 13: WHEN THE CLAIMANT ATTEMPTED TO INTRODUCE A NEW CASE DURING CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT (HOW DO WE THINK THIS WENT?)
  • THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 3: WHERE DO YOU LOOK IF YOU WANT (OR WANT TO OPPOSE) AN APPLICATION THAT A TRIAL BE ADJOURNED BECAUSE A PARTY OR WITNESS IS ILL?

Top Posts

  • THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF MAZUR CONSIDERED: HOW NOT TO BREAK THE CRIMINAL LAW BY USING NON-QUALIFIED STAFF... WEBINAR 3rd OCTOBER 2025
  • THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 3: WHERE DO YOU LOOK IF YOU WANT (OR WANT TO OPPOSE) AN APPLICATION THAT A TRIAL BE ADJOURNED BECAUSE A PARTY OR WITNESS IS ILL?
  • UPDATED VERSION OF THE CHANCERY GUIDE: A USEFUL LINK
  • AI USED IN THE WRITING OF A JUDICIAL DECISION: READ ALL ABOUT IT...
  • EXPERT WATCH 13: WHEN THE CLAIMANT ATTEMPTED TO INTRODUCE A NEW CASE DURING CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE DEFENDANTS' EXPERT (HOW DO WE THINK THIS WENT?)

Archives

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • 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 National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2023
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2025. 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 © 2025 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.