Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Refusal to mediate
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"

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”

June 22, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

Here we look at a case where the court made an order for indemnity costs.  The defendant had failed to engage fully in the litigation process and, importantly, failed to respond to the claimant’s offer to mediate.  The Master was…

COSTS BITES 377: SHOULD A  SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S REFUSAL TO MEDIATE  LEAD TO IT LOSING ITS RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS?

COSTS BITES 377: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEAD TO IT LOSING ITS RIGHT TO RECOVER COSTS?

April 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

Here we have a case where a claimant who lost a case at trial (and turned down an offer of £200,000) argued that there should be no order for costs.  That argument did not take it very far… “The Defendant’s…

COST BITES 340:  CLAIMANTS' CONDUCT,  FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND EFFECTIVE REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS

COST BITES 340: CLAIMANTS’ CONDUCT, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND EFFECTIVE REFUSAL TO MEDIATE LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS

January 29, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

Here we have a case where the claimants were (largely) successful but the court made no order for costs between the parties. There were three major factors (i) the way in which the claimants conducted the action; (ii) the failure…

COST BITES 324: COURT REFUSES TO REDUCE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S COSTS BECAUSE OF REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION

COST BITES 324: COURT REFUSES TO REDUCE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS BECAUSE OF REFUSAL TO ENGAGE IN MEDIATION

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

A party liable to pay the costs of a successful opponent is always keen to reduce that liability, not least by arguing that they should have a reduction in costs because of their opponent’s conduct. We see such an argument…

UPDATE ON PREVIOUS POST: SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT'S COSTS REDUCED BY 25% BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO CONSIDER MEDIATION

UPDATE ON PREVIOUS POST: SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANT’S COSTS REDUCED BY 25% BECAUSE THEY REFUSED TO CONSIDER MEDIATION

June 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

Following the previous post about the judgment of HHJ Mithani KC in Conway v Conway & Anor (Rev1) [2024] EW Misc 19 (CC)   there is an interesting post about the subsequent decision of costs. This is on Linked In by…

DAMAGES, COSTS AND MEDIATION: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS THE BOUNDARIES

DAMAGES, COSTS AND MEDIATION: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS THE BOUNDARIES

May 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Interest, Mediation, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

In  the judgment today Gore -v- Naheed [2017] EWCA 369 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of damages being awarded (when they had not been claimed) and where costs should lie when a party – reasonably – declined to…

A PARTY UNREASONABLY REFUSES TO MEDIATE BUT RECOVERS ALL ITS COSTS: WHY NORTHGROP GRUMMAN (2) IS ESSENTIAL READING

October 5, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

The question of costs liability following an “unreasonable” failure to mediate remain a developing area of law. This is an area with profound practical implications for litigators and their clients. That is why the decision of Mr Justice Ramsey in…

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

  • YOU CAN’T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN’T ATTEND – BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS …
  • PROVING THINGS 305 : DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH ANY BREACHES AND (IN ANY EVENT) HAD MADE A PROFIT HERE NOT A LOSS: IF YOU PLEAD DAMAGES YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO PROVE THEM
  • SERVICE POINTS 59: AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO SERVE THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DID NOT EXTEND TIME FOR THE CLAIM FORM: NEITHER DID THE ACTUAL STRIKING OUT OF THE ACTION…
  • THERE HAS NOT BEEN FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: THE DIFFICULTIES WHEN LITIGATION SPANS SEVERAL JURISDICTIONS: “THE SUPPOSED EXPLANATIONS BELATEDLY OFFERED … AMOUNT TO LITTLE MORE THAN AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THE FAILING WITH A RATHER LAME CONFESSION OF INABILITY TO EXPLAIN HOW OR WHY IT OCCURRED”
  • MI5: CONTEMPT OF COURT AND THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EXTERNAL REPORTS: THEY ARE ADMISSIBLE BUT CANNOT BE USED TO PROVE ANYTHING: A POINT OF GENERAL RELEVANCE NOT JUST SECRET AGENTS…

Top Posts

FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
WRITING LETTERS TO THE JUDGE AFTER A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS CIRCULATED: "THIS IS ABOUT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE CONDUCT OF SOLICITORS CONDUCTING LITIGATION AS IT IS POSSIBLE TO GET"
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
YOU CAN'T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN'T ATTEND - BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS ...
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT

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.