Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Relief from sanctions
WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT...  : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...

WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS – BUT… : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON…

April 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

Here we have a case where both parties failed to comply with a direction to file witness statements by a certain date.  The court granted relief from sanctions, and it is easy to see why. However it is case that…

AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"

AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”

April 17, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where an important time limit was, on the face of it missed, because the court itself “thwarted” genuine attempts to lodge an appeal in time.  It is an object lesson the care that needs to…

THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT TO EXTEND TIME  FOR SERVICE AS THE DEFENDANT ASSERTED: THE SCCO REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE

THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE AS THE DEFENDANT ASSERTED: THE SCCO REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE

April 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

This is an interesting judgement on two levels. Firstly the judge did not accept the defendant’s contention that there had been an agreement to extend time for service of Points of Dispute to a bill of costs. Secondly, applying the…

SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

April 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

For many years now we have been looking at the interaction between an application to set aside a default judgment and the “Denton” criteria.   Here we look at another case where the court considered relief from sanctions in this context. …

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE "BEAR TRAP" IN WAITING

BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE IMPORTANCE OF SERVING THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WITHIN THE TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: THE “BEAR TRAP” IN WAITING

March 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The back to basics point today is based on a recent case which shows the importance of serving the particulars of claim within the four month period allowed for service of the claim form. The claimant served the particulars three…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED AFTER CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: "THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE STRUCK OUT"

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED AFTER CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: “THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE STRUCK OUT”

March 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at the “second half” of the decision considered in the previous post.  Having rejected the claimant’s submissions that breaches of a peremptory order should be considered under CPR 3.10 the judge then went on to consider the…

THE BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER IS A SERIOUS MATTER: IT CANNOT SIMPLY BE DEALT WITH UNDER CPR 3.10

THE BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER IS A SERIOUS MATTER: IT CANNOT SIMPLY BE DEALT WITH UNDER CPR 3.10

March 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at an interesting, but eventually futile, about the approach the court should take when a party was in breach of a peremptory order.  The claimant in breach argued that the court should consider the matter under CPR…

APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE TRIAL: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED

APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE TRIAL: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED

March 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

A party who serves a witness statement late always has problems.  A litigant who tries to introduce a new witness on the morning of the trial has major problems. We have such an application here.  Unsurprisingly it did not fare…

THE SECRETARY OF STATE REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: "AN APPALLING MANIFESTATION OF A LAX CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE"

THE SECRETARY OF STATE REQUIRED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “AN APPALLING MANIFESTATION OF A LAX CULTURE OF NON-COMPLIANCE”

March 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

For (at least) the third time in recent weeks we are considering defaults or mistakes made on behalf of a Secretary of State. The delays and mistakes here were manifold. The Secretary of State was fortunate in obtaining an extension…

THROWBACK FRIDAY: "STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR: SHARING THE PAIN" (FEBRUARY 2020) (WITH LINKS TO THE WHOLE SERIES)

THROWBACK FRIDAY: “STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR: SHARING THE PAIN” (FEBRUARY 2020) (WITH LINKS TO THE WHOLE SERIES)

February 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Well being

In this series I always try to look at posts that remain relevant today. This post, indeed the series it was in from 2019 – 2020, clearly remain topical.  The Law Society Gazette last week reported that a record number…

MEMBER NEWS: A REMINDER OF MEMBER BENEFITS AND WHERE TO FIND THE DISCOUNT CODES: ESSENTIAL TOPICS COVERED IN WEBINARS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR

MEMBER NEWS: A REMINDER OF MEMBER BENEFITS AND WHERE TO FIND THE DISCOUNT CODES: ESSENTIAL TOPICS COVERED IN WEBINARS THROUGHOUT THE YEAR

February 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Relief from sanctions, Webinar, Witness statements

A reminder that member subscribers have access to discounts on webinars being presented throughout the year.   The details of the webinars, the  discounts and how to find the discount codes are below.  The first webinar sets out the practical consequences…

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION(1): A PRIMER FOR "WHEN THE SKY IS FALLING"

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION(1): A PRIMER FOR “WHEN THE SKY IS FALLING”

February 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Very little (if any) of the legal curriculum is devoted to what to do when things go wrong.  Not enough (in my view) is devoted to preventing things go wrong.  However here we concentrate on what do when something goes…

WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS A SOLICITOR'S FIRM AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CLAIM "HINDERED BY A SERIES OF PROCEDURAL BREACHES": NOT A GREAT START TO THE CASE

WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS A SOLICITOR’S FIRM AND THE PROGRESS OF THE CLAIM “HINDERED BY A SERIES OF PROCEDURAL BREACHES”: NOT A GREAT START TO THE CASE

February 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

It is a poor start to a solicitor’s application for judicial review of the Legal Ombudsman when the firm itself has failed to comply with rules and directions.  We have such a case here.  The claimant firm applied for judicial…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026

February 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

As regular readers of this site know procedural mistakes derail more civil claims than weak evidence or bad law. Missed deadlines, defective pleadings, non-compliance with court directions and costs failures can all result in serious sanctions — or the claim…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS DENIED AFTER A PATTERN  OF DEFAULT DELAY AND EXCUSES: TO BREACH ONE UNLESS ORDER MAY BE REGARDED AS MISFORTUNE, TO BREACH TWO LOOKS LIKE ...

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS DENIED AFTER A PATTERN OF DEFAULT DELAY AND EXCUSES: TO BREACH ONE UNLESS ORDER MAY BE REGARDED AS MISFORTUNE, TO BREACH TWO LOOKS LIKE …

February 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

Staying with the theme this week of the making and breaching of peremptory orders  alongside applications for relief from sanctions, we are considering what, on any view, as an “ambitious” application for relief from sanctions.  The defendant here had breached…

THE CLAIMANTS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: COURT REFUSES AN EXTENSION: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: OUT OF TIME MEANS OUT OF COURT...

THE CLAIMANTS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: COURT REFUSES AN EXTENSION: SOME IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE: OUT OF TIME MEANS OUT OF COURT…

February 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

One thing anyone considering an appeal should know, with absolute certainty, is the date the appeal has to be lodged. This, in turn, involves knowing the date on which the period starts running.  Here we see a case where the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED : WHEN NON-COMPLIANCE ALMOST APPEARS TO BE A LITIGATION STRATEGY: HAVING A BONA FIDE CLAIM DOES NOT GIVE YOU A FREE PASS

February 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we have a case where the Court of Appeal considered the Denton principles in some detail.  The judgment provides a useful reminder of some basic principles. Firstly that a litigant seeking relief from sanctions cannot complain about the original…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON'T HAVE THEM

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: PROCEDURAL DEFAULT, SANCTIONS AND OTHER ISSUES THAT CAUSE ACTIONS TO FAIL: WEBINAR 6th FEBRUARY 2026: REMEMBER WE LOOK AT THESE PROBLEMS TO TRY TO MAKE SURE YOU DON’T HAVE THEM

January 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The next webinar in the “Avoiding the Pitfalls” series is a 90 minute long webinar on the 6th February 2026.  The webinar examines the most common procedural problems and practical difficulties that arise in civil litigation.  It explores where and…

THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR - CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE

THE COURT REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A PEREMPTORY ORDER IN A SOLICITOR – CLIENT ACTION: LOTS TO LEARN HERE IN TERMS OF BOTH COSTS AND PROCEDURE

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions

Here we are looking at a case that bristles with issues both in relation to solicitor and own client costs, but also in relation to civil procedure and compliance with court orders. It serves as a reminder that a client…

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: "THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH"

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN COSTS BUDGET WAS SERVED THE DAY BEFORE THE CCMC: “THIS IS HIGH COURT LITIGATION WHICH IS SUBJECT TO RULES WHICH MUST BE COMPLIED WITH”

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we see another litigant coming to grief because of a failure to file a costs budget on time.  The litigant had been warned of the consequences and the judge found that there was no good reason for the breach. …

THROWBACK FRIDAY: APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS: LOOKING BACK TO JANUARY 2016

THROWBACK FRIDAY: APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS: LOOKING BACK TO JANUARY 2016

January 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

This blog celebrates its 13th birthday later this year.  Civil Litigation Brief started as a series in the Solicitors Journal 35 years ago. Needless to say it has a large “back catalogue”.  I wanted a regular opportunity to bring important…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: SPECIAL TWIXMAS EDITION: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AS EVIDENCE

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: SPECIAL TWIXMAS EDITION: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AS EVIDENCE

December 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The last Witness Evidence Wednesday of the year deals with an unusual case relating to relief from sanctions following a failure to serve witness evidence timeously. The judge at first instance had refused the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. …

THE AUTOMATIC STAY UNDER CPR 15.11: WAS IT IMPOSED IN THIS CASE? WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD THE COURT CONSIDER WHEN AN APPLICATION IS MADE TO LIFT IT? WAS THE DELAY AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

THE AUTOMATIC STAY UNDER CPR 15.11: WAS IT IMPOSED IN THIS CASE? WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD THE COURT CONSIDER WHEN AN APPLICATION IS MADE TO LIFT IT? WAS THE DELAY AN ABUSE OF PROCESS

December 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

If a claimant serves proceedings and then does nothing the rules impose an automatic stay on proceedings. CPR 15.11 states that a stay takes effect from 6 months after the date on which a defence should have been filed. Here…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 9: CASES ON SANCTIONS (AND RELIEF FROM...)(POSSIBLY A POOR CHOICE OF SUBJECT JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS...)

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 9: CASES ON SANCTIONS (AND RELIEF FROM…)(POSSIBLY A POOR CHOICE OF SUBJECT JUST BEFORE CHRISTMAS…)

December 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There have been times in the past when it has felt that the issue of sanctions for non-compliance was the only issue in civil procedure.   The number of (reported) cases has reduced, possibly because the relevant principles are now clear….

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE SERVED (VERY LATE): "THE TIME IS NOW"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE SERVED (VERY LATE): “THE TIME IS NOW”

December 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

We have seen examples of witness evidence served late, sometimes very late.  Here we see an example of witness evidence served five minutes before a hearing was due to start, and two months late. Further that evidence attempted to disavow…

APPEAL STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPELLANTS’ FAILURE TO FILE A COMPLIANT BUNDLE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

November 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

All those involved in the appeal process, indeed litigation generally, are best advised to read this judgment.  It is about the standard the court’s expect when an appeal is being brought. It is also about procedural failures and failures to…

DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE:  SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?

DEFENCES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: SHOULD RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS BE GRANTED?

November 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at a case where the defendants failed to comply with a peremptory order for disclosure.  The defences stood struck out.  The issue the judge had to determine was whether relief from sanctions should be granted. This in…

COST BITES 303:  THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED

COST BITES 303: THE SOLICITOR CANNOT PASS ON RESPONSIBILITY FOR A DEFECTIVE BILL TO THE COSTS LAWYER: A 75% REDUCTION BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE BILL WAS DRAFTED

November 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at a case involving a bill of costs that was wholly defective that the costs judge was invited to strike it out.  The judge came very close, but reduced the bill by 75% instead.    There…

DOES THE COUNTY COURT HAVE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE AN ACTION BROUGHT ON A FOREIGN JUDGMENT? SHOULD THE ACTION BE STRUCK OUT?

DOES THE COUNTY COURT HAVE JURISDICTION TO DECIDE AN ACTION BROUGHT ON A FOREIGN JUDGMENT? SHOULD THE ACTION BE STRUCK OUT?

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

Here we have the County Court considering an unusual issue of jurisdiction. Does it have jurisdiction to decide an action brought at common law on a foreign judgment? If it does not should the action be struck out or simply…

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL AND TO EXTEND TIME: THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK PERMISSION CAN EASILY BE MISSED: SOMETHING FOR WOULD BE APPELLANTS TO WATCH OUT FOR

SEEKING PERMISSION TO APPEAL AND TO EXTEND TIME: THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEEK PERMISSION CAN EASILY BE MISSED: SOMETHING FOR WOULD BE APPELLANTS TO WATCH OUT FOR

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The circumstances in which a judge at first instance can grant permission to appeal from their own decision are circumscribed by the rules.  Permission can only be given at the hearing itself, or any adjournment thereof.  The same applies to…

THE RESPONDENTS' ARGUMENTS ABOUT FAILURES OF PROCEDURE WERE NOT "NIT PICKING": RATHER THEY SHOWED THAT THE APPLICATION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY BROUGHT AND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED...

THE RESPONDENTS’ ARGUMENTS ABOUT FAILURES OF PROCEDURE WERE NOT “NIT PICKING”: RATHER THEY SHOWED THAT THE APPLICATION HAD NOT BEEN PROPERLY BROUGHT AND COULD NOT BE CONSIDERED…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

There are often major differences of view as to the effect of non-compliance with the rules. We have such differences here.  The claimants, in default, regarded the respondents’ procedural objections as “nit-picking”. The judge, however, held that the default was…

HIGH COURT REFUSES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN SKELETON ARGUMENT WAS SERVED LATE: BREACHES OF EVEN A DAY OR TWO SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED WITH EQUANIMITY

HIGH COURT REFUSES RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN SKELETON ARGUMENT WAS SERVED LATE: BREACHES OF EVEN A DAY OR TWO SHOULD NOT BE REGARDED WITH EQUANIMITY

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Written advocacy

If a skeleton argument is served late then relief from sanctions is required.  The case we are looking at here makes it clear that it is prudent to make a formal application rather than assume relief will be granted “on…

WHEN A RESPONDENT'S NOTICE IS REALLY A CROSS-APPEAL: SHOULD THE COURT GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ALLOW THE "APPEAL" TO BE ARGUED?

WHEN A RESPONDENT’S NOTICE IS REALLY A CROSS-APPEAL: SHOULD THE COURT GRANT AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO ALLOW THE “APPEAL” TO BE ARGUED?

October 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Sometimes a respondent’s notice is really a cross-appeal attempting to disguise itself.  We are looking at such a case here.   The “respondent’s notice” was served late, and permission was given to serve it. However on closer examination at the appeal…

SHOULD THE COURT GIVE  ADEFENDANT  PERMISSION TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SENT "EARLY" BUT NOT SERVED AS A TRIAL WITNESS STATEMENT?

SHOULD THE COURT GIVE ADEFENDANT PERMISSION TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS SENT “EARLY” BUT NOT SERVED AS A TRIAL WITNESS STATEMENT?

October 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

We are looking at an application to rely on a witness statement that was served “late”.   The statement had, in fact, been served on the claimants ahead of the deadline but not served as a witness statement for trial.   When…

SERVICE POINTS 13: IS A CLAIMANT  SAVED BY THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE OR MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 11? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE A VIEW...

SERVICE POINTS 13: IS A CLAIMANT SAVED BY THE FACT THAT THE DEFENDANT DID NOT FILE AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE OR MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 11? THE COURT OF APPEAL HAVE A VIEW…

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Over the years many claimants have been “rescued” by  a defendant’s failure to make a timely, or correct, application to dispute the jurisdiction when the claim form has been improperly served.   The limits of the defendant’s obligations were considered by…

SERVICE POINTS 12: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CPR 7.6 APPLIED AND NOT 3.9 (THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE GOOGLED THIS)

SERVICE POINTS 12: ANOTHER CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: CPR 7.6 APPLIED AND NOT 3.9 (THE CLAIMANT COULD HAVE GOOGLED THIS)

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

Here we look at another case where a claimant has come to grief because of a failure to serve the claim form.  The ingenious arguments that he should have relief from sanctions were successful at first instance, but were rejected…

WHEN CPR 3.10 CAN HELP: PROCEEDINGS HAD BEEN "ISSUED" ALBEIT IMPERFECTLY AND THE SITUATION COULD BE REMEDIED (TO THE CLAIMANT'S DETERIMENT IN THIS CASE)

WHEN CPR 3.10 CAN HELP: PROCEEDINGS HAD BEEN “ISSUED” ALBEIT IMPERFECTLY AND THE SITUATION COULD BE REMEDIED (TO THE CLAIMANT’S DETERIMENT IN THIS CASE)

September 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I have written before about the “heavy lifting” that sometimes takes place when practitioners attempt to invoke  CPR 3.10. Here we look at a case where CPR 3.10 was used to condemn a claimant who had used the wrong procedure…

DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO CHALLENGE COSTS PROVISIONS REFUSED: 21 DAYS WAS A SERIOUS AND SIGNIFICANT BREACH AND THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON FOR IT

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME TO CHALLENGE COSTS PROVISIONS REFUSED: 21 DAYS WAS A SERIOUS AND SIGNIFICANT BREACH AND THERE WAS NO GOOD REASON FOR IT

September 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at a case where the court refused the defendant’s application to extend time when the defendant wanted to challenge the argument that costs were capped.  It was held that the defendant’s delay of 21 days was…

SERVICE POINTS 6: THERE ARE NO EASILY ACCESSIBLE "BACKDOOR" METHODS FOR CIRUMVENTING THE RULES RELATING TO APPLICATIONS FOR RETROSPECTIVE SERVICE

SERVICE POINTS 6: THERE ARE NO EASILY ACCESSIBLE “BACKDOOR” METHODS FOR CIRUMVENTING THE RULES RELATING TO APPLICATIONS FOR RETROSPECTIVE SERVICE

September 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

It may not have escaped reader’s notice that we have already started the month by looking at a case about defects in the service of the claim form.  The claimants in that case (which was said to be a £22…

APPLYING TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: WHAT IS MEANT BY "PROMPT"? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL BY THE HIGH COURT

APPLYING TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: WHAT IS MEANT BY “PROMPT”? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL BY THE HIGH COURT

August 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment

When a court considers setting aside a regular default judgment it must have regard to whether the application was made “promptly”.  There is a consideration of that issue in the case we consider here.  There had been some delay in…

APPEAL COURT UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO RELY ON DOCUMENTS PRODUCED FOR THE FIRST TIME AT TRIAL: DENTON CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

APPEAL COURT UPHOLDS DECISION NOT TO ALLOW DEFENDANT TO RELY ON DOCUMENTS PRODUCED FOR THE FIRST TIME AT TRIAL: DENTON CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

August 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

We are looking at a decision newly arrived on BAILII in relation to disclosure and relief from sanctions.  A defendant brought (potentially significant) documents to trial which had never been disclosed before. The trial judge did not permit the defendant…

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION 2025: WEBINAR 4th AUGUST 2025

WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION 2025: WEBINAR 4th AUGUST 2025

July 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Relief from sanctions, Webinar, Witness statements

One of the most aggravating things to read about in the legal press are those cases where people get into serious disciplinary trouble after having made a procedural or other mistake. It is not the mistake that has caused their…

WHEN A SOLICITOR FORGETS TO SIGN AN IMPORTANT PART OF AN APPEAL DOCUMENT: CAN CPR 3.10 SAVE THE DAY? A TRICKY POINT TO WATCH IN FORM N161

WHEN A SOLICITOR FORGETS TO SIGN AN IMPORTANT PART OF AN APPEAL DOCUMENT: CAN CPR 3.10 SAVE THE DAY? A TRICKY POINT TO WATCH IN FORM N161

July 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

CPR 3.10 is a rule often asked to so some “heavy lifting” by applicants who have not complied with the rules or court orders.  Sometimes it is not capable of handling the load, particularly in relation to issues surrounding service…

COURT REFUSES TO GRANT A DEFENDANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE WAS FILED (VERY) LATE: ALSO REJECTS "BRAVE" SUBMISSION THAT THIS WAS A "TECHNICAL" BREACH

COURT REFUSES TO GRANT A DEFENDANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE WAS FILED (VERY) LATE: ALSO REJECTS “BRAVE” SUBMISSION THAT THIS WAS A “TECHNICAL” BREACH

July 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form

There are dozens, possibly hundreds, of posts on this site about the application of the Denton criteria and relief from sanctions.  We have another case here. A defendant applied for relief from sanctions when the acknowledgment of service was filed…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 22: WHOLE BATCHES OF CASES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE THE PARTICULARS WERE DEFICIENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 22: WHOLE BATCHES OF CASES STRUCK OUT BECAUSE THE PARTICULARS WERE DEFICIENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

July 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

Here we are looking at a case where numerous actions brought by the claimant were struck out because the Particulars of Claim were wholly deficient.  They remained wholly deficient even after the court had made a peremptory order compelling the…

CLAIMANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (ON APPEAL) FOLLOWING LATE SERVICE OF A COSTS BUDGET (TWO YEARS AND FIVE MONTHS LATE…): BUT AT A COST…

July 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Cases relating to late service of the costs budget are still filtering through. Rarely, however,  does the failure extend over 2 years and 4 months as it does here. Despite the delay the claimant’s successfully appealed against the initial refusal…

SECOND (AND THIRD) APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF THAT ARE, ESSENTIALLY,  FOR THE SAME THING NOT ALLOWED TO PROCEED: THE APPLICATIONS WERE ABUSIVE

SECOND (AND THIRD) APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF THAT ARE, ESSENTIALLY, FOR THE SAME THING NOT ALLOWED TO PROCEED: THE APPLICATIONS WERE ABUSIVE

July 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

Here we are looking at a case where defendants, debarred from defending an action, made consecutive (and ultimately fruitless) applications to vary the orders that caused them to be debarred and several applications for relief from sanction.  The court was…

NO RELIEF FOR CLAIMANTS WHO SERVED THE CLAIM FORM LATE:  TAKING A POINT AS TO SERVICE IS NOT "PLAYING TECHNICAL GAMES"

NO RELIEF FOR CLAIMANTS WHO SERVED THE CLAIM FORM LATE: TAKING A POINT AS TO SERVICE IS NOT “PLAYING TECHNICAL GAMES”

June 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

It may be possible for a month to go by without a mis-service of the claim form issue arising in the courts, but it is not this month.  We have here a case with the familiar litany of waiting to…

THE JUDGE'S DECISION TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS TO A DEFENDANT WAS APPROPRIATE: SOME WORDS AS TO HOW PEREMPTORY ORDERS SHOULD BE DRAFTED.

THE JUDGE’S DECISION TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS TO A DEFENDANT WAS APPROPRIATE: SOME WORDS AS TO HOW PEREMPTORY ORDERS SHOULD BE DRAFTED.

May 14, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Today we are looking at a case where the Court of Appeal upheld a decision granting a defendant relief from sanctions.  However this is a case of “two halves” in that the claimant had a more favourable decision in relation…

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ARGUE ABOUT COSTS (BUT WAS ALLOWED TO ARGUE ABOUT THE WASTED COSTS)

DEFENDANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND WAS NOT ABLE TO ARGUE ABOUT COSTS (BUT WAS ALLOWED TO ARGUE ABOUT THE WASTED COSTS)

May 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we are looking at another aspect of the case we looked at yesterday.  Most of the attention in that case relates to the fake cases that the claimant relied upon.  However there was criticism of the defendant too.  The…

1 2 … 13 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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 19th JUNE 2026 (TOGETHER WITH A USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRE AND SERIES OF CHECKLISTS)
  • THE “WEAPONISATION” OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT’S NOT CLEVER, IT’S NOT “TOUGH” AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COST BITES 378 : REFORM OF THE SOLICITORS ACT 1974, PART III: READ THE CONSULATION PAPER: A CHANCE TO COMMENT ON THE PROVISIONS THAT ARE “A GREAT MYSTERY” TO MANY SOLICITORS (NOT MY WORDS…)
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A “NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE” (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS – BUT… : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON…

Top Posts

  • COST (MEGA) BITES 378: WHO WOULD SPEND £15,751,483 PLUS VAT TO RECOVER DAMAGES OF £16.91? (WELCOME TO THE SURREAL WORLD OF "COLLECTIVE PROCEEDINGS": THE CAT ARE CONCERNED THAT LITIGATION IS BEING BROUGHT FOR THE LAWYERS & FUNDERS RATHER THAN CONSUMERS
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • THE "WEAPONISATION" OF APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: IT'S NOT CLEVER, IT'S NOT "TOUGH" AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT A MARKETING TOOL
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 2: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PD57AC: "HE KNOWS NOT OF WHAT HE SPEAKS"

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.