Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Setting aside default judgment
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. …

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…

SERVICE POINTS 4:  DEFAULT JUDGMENT SET ASIDE: THE CONTRACTUAL METHOD OF SERVICE WAS UNFAIR AND THUS INVALID BECAUSE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015

SERVICE POINTS 4: DEFAULT JUDGMENT SET ASIDE: THE CONTRACTUAL METHOD OF SERVICE WAS UNFAIR AND THUS INVALID BECAUSE OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONSUMER RIGHTS ACT 2015

August 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment

There are relatively few cases relating to service of proceedings by a contractually agreed method.  We have some significant issues considered in this case. Firstly whether the defendants were, in fact, parties to the contract that the claimant relied upon…

THE DEFENDANT'S DELAY LEADS TO COURT OF APPEAL REFUSING TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING PROMPT

THE DEFENDANT’S DELAY LEADS TO COURT OF APPEAL REFUSING TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING PROMPT

May 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

Today we are looking at a case where a defendant waited 16 months before applying to set aside a default judgment. That application to set aside was successful at first instance but overturned by the Court of Appeal. The Court…

ENTERING JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: NO DUTY ON THE PARTIES TO HELP EACH OTHER: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING THE RULES

ENTERING JUDGMENT IN DEFAULT: NO DUTY ON THE PARTIES TO HELP EACH OTHER: THE IMPORTANCE OF KNOWING THE RULES

August 21, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There are some interesting observations in the judgment of  HHJ Cadwallader (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) in Thiscompany Ltd & Ors v Welsh & Ors [2024] EWHC 2159 (Comm). It was a case where three of the…

APPLICATION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THREE MONTHS DELAY IS NOT “PROMPT”: ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE AND A DRAFT DEFENCE DID NOT HELP

November 27, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Default judgment,, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

In Pincus v Singh & Anor [2023] EWHC 2997 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews refused a defendant’s application to set aside a default judgment.  The defendant had waited for three months before making the application.  There was no evidence in support…

SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: HAVE COGENT EVIDENCE (AND A DRAFT DEFENCE) TO HAND: DEFENDANT'S DELAY ALONE WOULD HAVE LED TO APPLICATION BEING REFUSED IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

SETTING ASIDE A DEFAULT JUDGMENT: HAVE COGENT EVIDENCE (AND A DRAFT DEFENCE) TO HAND: DEFENDANT’S DELAY ALONE WOULD HAVE LED TO APPLICATION BEING REFUSED IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

July 20, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

I am grateful to Barrister Leslie Keegan for their note of the judgment of Master Cook in Buckingham -v- Elneil (15th July 2022)*. The Master refused the defendant’s application to set aside a default judgment.  The defendant did not have…

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

  • COST BITES 379: HIGH COURT JUDGE UPHOLDS DECISION THAT INTERIM BILLS WERE STATUTE BILLS AND THAT THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT SEEK ASSESSMENT OUT OF TIME
  • OPENING LINES TO START THE WEEK: “FOR CENTURIES, IT HAS BEEN RECOGNISED THAT HUMAN HEARING CAN BE DAMAGED BY EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE”
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN YOU ARE SEEKING PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH IT WILL ALL COST…
  • 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

Top Posts

  • OPENING LINES TO START THE WEEK: "FOR CENTURIES, IT HAS BEEN RECOGNISED THAT HUMAN HEARING CAN BE DAMAGED BY EXPOSURE TO LOUD NOISE"
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN YOU ARE SEEKING PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH IT WILL ALL COST...
  • COST BITES 379: HIGH COURT JUDGE UPHOLDS DECISION THAT INTERIM BILLS WERE STATUTE BILLS AND THAT THE CLAIMANT COULD NOT SEEK ASSESSMENT OUT OF TIME
  • 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..."

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.