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 » Page 8

TAKING TECHNICAL POINTS AS TO SERVICE: JUDICIAL "DISMAY" THAT THE MATTER WAS PURSUED

April 25, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Uncategorized

One of the most difficult decisions that litigators now face is whether to take “technical points”. Technical points, particularly as to service of the claim form, can potentially bring proceedings to a premature end. However there are risks as well…

"IN TIME" APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME FOR PEREMPTORY ORDER REFUSED: CLAIM STRUCK OUT

April 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Charles Bagot of Hardwicke Chambers for bringing my attention to the decision in Kranniqi -v- Watford Timber Company Ltd (District Judge Parfitt 13/04/2016). It is a working example of (i)the dangers of failing to comply with…

"AMPLIFYING" WITNESS STATEMENTS AT TRIAL: IT IS PROBABLY FAR TOO LATE

April 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Anyone giving a talk, particularly to a group of lawyers,  always has a fear that someone will ask the “unanswerable” question. There was a good question today at the PIBA conference after a talk I gave about witness statements.  The…

IN-HOUSE COURSES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE

IN-HOUSE COURSES ON WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CIVIL PROCEDURE

April 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In response to several e-mails over recent months I have prepared two courses, available in-house only: one on drafting witness statements, the other on “avoiding procedural pitfalls”. WITNESS STATEMENTS “Too often (indeed far too often) witnesses who have had statements…

COSTS BUDGET SERVED LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS ALLOWED ON APPEAL

April 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In a judgment given today His Honour Judge Peter Gregory allowed an appeal against a decision to confine a claimant’s costs budget to court fees following late service of the costs budget. The case indicates that a more nuanced approach…

LITIGATION AND WORKLOAD 3: INSURERS

LITIGATION AND WORKLOAD 3: INSURERS

March 29, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Interim Payments, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The first post in this series on litigators and workload got an (unexpected) amount of attention.  As part of the series I want to look at one often overlooked, but crucial, part of the litigation chain, insurers. In particular claims…

"INAPPROPRIATE TECHNICAL GAMES": ANOTHER CASE ABOUT SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM: DEFENDANT SNAPPED INTO SHAPE

March 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Serving documents, Statements of Truth, Striking out, Uncategorized

The judgment of His Honour Judge Hacon in Abbott -v-Econowall Ltd [2016] EWHC 660 (IPEC) contains some important observations about the conduct expected in litigation. Also some important lessons in relation to agreeing extensions of time for service. “…parties to…

LITIGATION: WHAT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE LOAD AND IS IT IMPORTANT?

LITIGATION: WHAT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE LOAD AND IS IT IMPORTANT?

March 20, 2016 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Conduct, Members Content, Uncategorized

I have been planning to write on litigators’ workloads for a considerable time. It is an important issue and, as far as I can tell, very little is written about it.  The issue is a fundamental one. What is the…

BRITISH GAS HAS PRODUCED SOME HOT AIR: DENTON APPLIED NOT CONVERTED

March 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

I have already seen several headlines, and numerous commentaries, that mention the “hard line” taken by the Court of Appeal in British Gas Trading -v- Oak Cash & Carry Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 153.  The case is not as draconian as…

DENTON AND DELAY IN APPLYING FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE PRINCIPLES CANNOT BE CASH AND CARRIED AWAY

March 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in British Gas Trading -v- Oak Cash & Carry Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 153 reiterates the significance of the Denton principles. It also emphasises the importance of applying for relief from sanctions promptly….

DELAY, DISCRETION AND SETTING ASIDE JUDGMENT

March 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Statements of Case, Uncategorized

In the judgment today in Albesher -v- Ryan [2016] EWHC 541 (Comm) Mr Justice Walker considered issues of delay in an application to set aside a default judgment.   KEY POINTS A regular judgment was set aside because there was…

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…

DENTON CRITERIA OVERRIDES ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: A WAKE UP CALL FOR THE INSURANCE INDUSTRY?

March 10, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

In Gentry -v- Miller and UK Insurance Company [2016] EWCA Civ 141 the Court of Appeal held that the fact that a defendant was alleging fraud did not entitle it to any special treatment in relation to breaches of rules….

DENTON DOES NOT APPLY TO DELAY IN PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT

March 5, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Simon Anderson of Park Square Barristers for his note of the judgment of Deputy District Judge Hill yesterday (4th March 2016) in the case of Martin -v- The Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. This decision is…

THERE IS NO SPECIAL RULE FOR PUBLIC AUTHORITIES: SECRETARY OF STATE NOT GRANTED PERMISSION TO APPEAL OUT OF TIME

March 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The previous post emphasised the point that state agencies have no preferred status when it comes to compliance with rules and relief from sanctions. This point was made clear again by the Court of Appeal judgment in The Secretary of…

A "DISTURBING" APPROACH TO COMPLIANCE: STATE AGENCIES HAVE NO PREFERRED STATUS

March 3, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in BPP Holdings -v- The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs [2016] EWCA Civ 121, contains some observations in relation to compliance that are of general relevance.  Not least everyone litigating on…

LATE APPLICATIONS TO AMEND & WITNESS STATEMENTS DELIBERATELY NOT SERVED: THIS DOESN'T END WELL FOR THE DEFAULTING PARTY

February 15, 2016 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Birch -v- Beccanor Limited & Dixon [2016] EWHC 265 (Ch) Mr Justice Norris refused an application for late amendment. He also refused an application to adjourn in circumstances where the defendant had deliberately served witness evidence late. KEY POINTS The…

WHAT IS A TRIAL? AND WHY DOES IT MATTER?

February 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Pickard -v- Roberts [2016] EWHC 187 (Ch) Mr John Baldwin QC (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division)  had to consider whether a hearing was a “trial” and whether this had any impact upon the decision to…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, "MATERIALITY" & CONSIDERING THE MERITS IN A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL OF RELIEF ALLOWED

January 23, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Setting aside judgment, Uncategorized

In Joshi & Welch Limited -v- Tay Foods [2015] EWHC 3905 (QB) Mr Justice Green allowed an appeal where the judge a first instance refused to grant relief from sanctions.  Much centred on the definition of the word “material”.  The…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATIONS: 10 POINTS TO IMPROVE THE ODDS

January 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

It is now just over 18 months since the Denton decision. Cases in relation to relief from sanction are still being reported regularly.  It is clear that default remains a problem and an issue within the civil courts. Further it…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: NO PERMISSION TO SERVE RESPONDENT'S NOTICE LATE

January 19, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Pipe -v- Spicerhaart Estate Agents Ltd [2016] EWHC 61 QB Mr Justice Sweeney refused permission to serve a Respondent’s notice late. “Against the background that this is a small claims case, the conduct of the Respondent in relation to…

DECISION NOT TO ADMIT LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE UPHELD BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the decision in Judges Sykes Frixous -v- Bhabra (CA 14/010/2016).*  This provides another example of a party (unsuccessfully) trying to serve witness evidence late in the day.  There are numerous posts on…

NO RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AFTER BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER: HIGH COURT DECISION CONSIDERED

January 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Security for Costs, Uncategorized

In Sinclair -V- Dorsey & Whitney (Europe) LLP [2015] EWHC 3888 (Comm) Mr Justice refused an application from relief from sanctions. (I am grateful to Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd for sending me a copy of the transcript). “The starting point is…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, FRAUD AND THE CHANGING SITUATION

January 4, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

I must preface this post with the warning that it is not possible to cite decisions relating to  permission to appeal.  However the decision in Bawden -v- WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC [2015] EWCA Civ 957 is interesting in itself. The…

SUPREME SANCTIONS IN THE SUPREME COURT: NO SECOND BITE OF THE CHERRY

December 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of the Supreme Court in Thevarajah -v- Riordan [2015] UKSC 78 has been long anticipated since it related to the law relating to sanctions. In fact it is a decision in relation to a very narrow issues.  The…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED IN £30 MILLION CASE: NOT ALL SANCTIONS ARE EQUAL

November 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Sinclair -v- Dorsey & Whitney (Mr Justice Popplewell 20/11/2015)* an application for relief from sanctions was refused in a case that the claimant valued at £30 million. THE CASE The claimants had been ordered to provide security for costs….

DEFENDANT NOT ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION AND DEBARRED FROM RELYING ON FURTHER EVIDENCE: PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT

November 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Clark -v- Braintree Clinical Services Limited [2015] EWHC 3181 HH Judge Burrell QC  (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a defendant’s application to resile from an admission. He also granted the claimant’s application to debar the defendant from…

COSTS AFTER RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT

November 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

An earlier post looked at the decision of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in North Midland Construction plc -v- Geo Networks Ltd [2015] 2384 (TCC).  Here we look at the subsequent order in relation to costs. THE CASE The claimant failed to…

DENTON, DELAY AND THE COURT OF APPEAL: OUT OF TIME APPEAL REFUSED

November 8, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The Court of Appeal considered the Denton criteria in JA (Ghana) -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWCA Civ 1031. A decision that emphasises that the criteria can be applied rigorously. “A more appropriate and (individually)…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO ALLOW APPEAL WHERE RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED FOLLOWING FAILURE TO GIVE TIMEOUS NOTICE OF FUNDING

October 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In its judgment today in  Mischon De Reya -v- Caliendo [2015] EWCA Civ 1029 the Court of Appeal refused the Defendant’s appeal where a claimant had been granted relief from sanctions following a failure to give proper notice of funding….

WITNESS STATEMENTS & SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS

October 11, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized, Witness statements

We looked in an earlier post at the case of Ali -v- CIS General Insurance (29/7/2015) where a claimant’s action was struck out because of failure to give disclosure. However there was a passing comment in the judgment  which demonstrated…

SERVED A COPY CLAIM FORM BY MISTAKE? THERE MAY BE A WAY OUT: BUT BE CAREFUL

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

In United Utilities Group PLC -v- Hart (HH Judge Wood, Liverpool County Court, 24th September 2015*) a claimant was granted a “reprieve” after having served a photocopy of the claim form by mistake.  However this is another one of those…

THE DATE OF KNOWLEDGE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE LIMITATION ACT: DELAY WHEN APPLYING TO SET JUDGMENT ASIDE

October 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Judgment, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

In Blakemores LDP -v- Scott [2015] EWCA Civ 999 the Court of Appeal considered issues relating to date of knowledge for the purpose of  s.14A of the Limitation Act 1980 . The court also considered the impact of delay when…

CASE STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO GIVE DISCLOSURE IN RELATION TO LATER ACCIDENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

October 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out, Uncategorized

In Ali -v- CIS General Insurance 2015 WL 5037781 His Honour Judge Cryan upheld a decision striking out a claim for failure to comply with disclosure. “The failure to comply with the order for disclosure was a serious failure to…

RESPONDENT TO APPLICATION TO AMEND PLEADINGS ORDERED TO PAY COSTS BECAUSE THEY SHOULD HAVE CONSENTED

September 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized

I am grateful to Tobias Haynes from Regulatory Legal solicitors for sending me details of a judgment given today in relation to the costs of amendment. This is based on Tobias’ note of the judgment which was given today (30th…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM; RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND CHALLENGING THE JURISDICTION: A COMPLEX MIX?

September 27, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Uncategorized

The decision of Judge Hacon in Cant -v- Hertz Corporation [2015] EWHC 2617 (Ch) raises some interesting issues.  However, equally interesting, are the issues that were not addressed. In particular the issues relating to the applicability of CPR Part 11…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: LATE SERVICE OF NOTICE OF FUNDING

September 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

Relief from sanctions following late service of the notice of funding was granted by Mr Justice Simon in Jackson -v- Thompson Solicitors (& others) [2015] EWHC 549 (QB). THE CASE The claimant had failed in an action against multiple defendants…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN THE TCC: LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

August 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Uncategorized

The judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in North Midland Construction plc -v- Geo Networks Ltd [2015] EWHC 2384 (TCC) provides an object lesson in the dangers of delaying service of the particulars of claim. THE CASE The claimant issued two…

POST MITCHELL PRE-DENTON RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPEAL: MITCHELL PRINCIPLES WERE NOT HERE TO STAY

July 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The appeal in Michael Wilson & Partners Ltd -v- Sinclair [2015] EWCA Civ 774 involves the Court of Appeal considering the Mitchell/Denton divide. KEY POINTS The Court overturned a decision, made post-Mitchell but prior to Denton, where a judge refused…

EXTENDING TIME FOR SERVING PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: AN APPLICATION AHEAD OF TIME SAVES THE DAY

June 29, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Serving documents, Statements of Case

In Lachaux -v- Independent Print Ltd [2015] EWHC 1847 (QB) Mr Justice Nicol considered the question of whether the court has power to prospectively order  an extension of time for service of the particulars of claim. He also considered the…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS AND COSTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: NO DOUBLE STANDARDS FOR THE GOVERNMENT

June 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In The Queen (on the application of Bhatt) -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1724 (Admin) Helen Mountfield QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge) made some interesting observations in relation to the Denton principles, conduct…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED FOLLOWING INADEQUATE E-DISCLOSURE:

June 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The case of Smailes -v- McNally [2015] EWHC 1755 (Ch) has appeared in the reports before.  In his judgment today His Honour Judge Pelling QC refused relief from sanctions after the claimant had failed to give adequate disclosure in compliance…

LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS: DON'T GO TO COLLEGE – JUST READ THE RULES

June 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In R (on the application of the London College of Finance & Accounting) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1688 (Admin) Mr Justice Cobb made some important observations in relation to the late service of evidence…

DENTON IN THE CONTEXT OF JUDICIAL REVIEW: PUBLIC INTEREST A HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT CONSIDERATION

June 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In The Queen (on the application of Charith Missaka Wijesinghe) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1558(Admin) HH Judge Deborah Taylor (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the Denton principles in relation to an…

SUCCESS FEES : DEFECTIVE NOTICE OF FUNDING AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: A WHOLE BUNDLE OF ISSUES

June 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The decision of Mr Justice Edis in O’Brien -v- Shorrock & the MIB [2015] EWHC 1630 (QB) deals with a number of important issues in relation to costs, notice of funding, the backdating of conditional fee agreements  and relief from sanctions. THE…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON

June 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Warren in Chadwick -v- Burling [2015] EWHC 1610 (Ch) highlights some important issues in relation to relief from sanctions in general, and the position of litigants in person in particular. THE CASE The applicant in…

INDEMNITY COSTS AGAINST RESPONDENT IN RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS APPLICATION: WHAT A WASTE?

May 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a brief report on Lawtel* of the decision of Popplewell J in Viridor Waste Management Ltd -v- Veolia Es Ltd (QBD (Comm) 22/05/2015. THE CASE The claimant was bringing an action for £27 million unjust enrichment. The claim…

HELL IT WAS IN "THAT FEBRILE TIME": OSTRICHES, MITCHELL, DENTON AND THE "BRILLIANT READJUSTMENT"

May 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There are some interesting observations made by Lord Dyson MR in The English Experience of Access to Justice Reform. In particular the look back at the “febrile” atmosphere that Mitchell created and the rationale of the subsequent “revision” in Denton….

FAILURE TO COMPLETE PRE-TRIAL REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE FULLY LEADS TO DEFENCE AND COUNTERCLAIM BEING STRUCK OUT

May 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Waterman Transport Ltd -v- Torchwood Properties Ltd [2015] EWHC 1446 (TCC) Mr Justice Akenhead entered judgment for a claimant and struck out a counterclaim after the defendant failed to file a completed pre-trial review questionnaire properly. THE CASE The…

THAT "DIFFICULT SECOND STATEMENT": IT IS HARDLY EVER GOING TO BE A HIT

May 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment in Buswell -v- Symes [2015] EWHC 1379 (QB) illustrates the dangers of “supplementary “witness statements. Real problems can occur for the party putting in the new evidence. THE CASE The claimant was seriously injured when his motorcycle was…

← Previous 1 … 7 8 9 … 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

  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: “THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES…”
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • 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…)

Top Posts

  • 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
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: SCHEDULES AND COUNTER-SCHEDULES ARE NOT A "NUMBER CRUNCHING EXERCISE" (APRIL 2018)
  • PROVING THINGS 288: HOW SHOULD A COURT CONSIDER A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS WHEN THE CLAIMANT IS STILL IN EMPLOYMENT? SMITH -v- MANCHESTER APPROACH PREVAILS
  • COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP 3: WHY PD57AC WAS INTRODUCED: "THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE SCOPE OF EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF IS NO LONGER THE STOCK-IN-TRADE KNOWLEDGE OF THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROOFING WITNESSSES..."
  • 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...)

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.