Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Statements of Case » Page 3
LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO PURSUE CLAIM AGAINST ONE DEFENDANT BUT NOT THE OTHER: WHAT A DIFFERENCE AN ADMISSION MAKES

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: CLAIMANT ALLOWED TO PURSUE CLAIM AGAINST ONE DEFENDANT BUT NOT THE OTHER: WHAT A DIFFERENCE AN ADMISSION MAKES

March 14, 2024 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

In  Bangs v FM Conway Ltd & Anor [2024] EWHC 494 (Comm) Mr Justice Jacobs considered the claimant’s application for relief from sanctions when the particulars of claim had been served late.  He allowed the claimant’s application against one defendant…

CLAIMANT'S APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE THE JUDGE FOUND FOR THE DEFENDANT ON A BASIS THAT WAS NOT PLEADED

CLAIMANT’S APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE THE JUDGE FOUND FOR THE DEFENDANT ON A BASIS THAT WAS NOT PLEADED

February 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

I am grateful to barrister Tom Morris for giving me details of the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Jacobs v Chalcot Crescent (Management) Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 259 (Ch).  It is an important case about statements of case. The…

A CLAIMANT, ALLEGING FRAUD, IS NOT ENTITLED TO DELIBERATELY BREACH A COURT ORDER AND THE RULES OF COURT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT GIVES LITIGATORS MUCH TO THINK ABOUT

A CLAIMANT, ALLEGING FRAUD, IS NOT ENTITLED TO DELIBERATELY BREACH A COURT ORDER AND THE RULES OF COURT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT GIVES LITIGATORS MUCH TO THINK ABOUT

December 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

Those who draft pleadings, particularly those alleging fraud and misconduct, have much to learn from the judgment of Mr Justice Johnson in AXA Insurance UK PLC v Kryeziu & Ors [2023] EWHC 3233 (KB). The fact that a party is…

"PLEADINGS ARE INTENDED TO IDENTIFY THE ISSUES, NOT OBSCURE THEM": COMMENTS ON STATEMENTS OF CASE: THEY SHOULD PROVIDE LIGHT NOT DARKNESS

“PLEADINGS ARE INTENDED TO IDENTIFY THE ISSUES, NOT OBSCURE THEM”: COMMENTS ON STATEMENTS OF CASE: THEY SHOULD PROVIDE LIGHT NOT DARKNESS

November 21, 2023 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Case

There have been a number of cases recently where judges have commented on the state of the pleadings. We see observations being made by Mr Justice Ritchie in the decision today in DMH Electrical (UK) Ltd v MK City Group…

THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE TO ALLOW A "NEW POINT" TO BE TAKEN ON APPEAL: DON'T FORGET PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT...

THE JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE TO ALLOW A “NEW POINT” TO BE TAKEN ON APPEAL: DON’T FORGET PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT…

November 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Azhar v All Money Matters t/a TFC Home Loans [2023] EWCA Civ 1341 the Court of Appeal rejected a defendant’s argument that it should have been permitted to raise a “new” point on appeal.  The matter upon which the…

PROVING THINGS 235: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF DEFENDANT: THE JUDGE'S FINDINGS WERE NOT OPEN TO HIM: THE FACTUAL FINDINGS WERE WRONG

PROVING THINGS 235: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF DEFENDANT: THE JUDGE’S FINDINGS WERE NOT OPEN TO HIM: THE FACTUAL FINDINGS WERE WRONG

November 7, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

The Court of Appeal judgment today in Clements-Siddall v Dunbobbin Hotels Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 1300 is a rare example of the Court of Appeal overturning a judge’s findings on the facts.  It is also an example of the importance…

THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WERE TOO LONG, TOO CONFUSING AND DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES.

THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM WERE TOO LONG, TOO CONFUSING AND DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES.

August 8, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Halsion Limited v St Thomas Street Development Limited [2023] EWHC 2045 (TCC) HHJ Cawson KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, struck out the claimant’s Particulars of Claim.  The Particulars were too long and rambling and failed to comply…

AN INTERESTING ISSUE: CLAIMANT WHO FAILS TO PLEAD CONTRACTUAL INTEREST  - DOESN'T GET INTEREST AT ALL

AN INTERESTING ISSUE: CLAIMANT WHO FAILS TO PLEAD CONTRACTUAL INTEREST – DOESN’T GET INTEREST AT ALL

August 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Interest, Members Content, Statements of Case

The judgment of Mr Justice Foxton in Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc v Goodrich Corporation [2023] EWHC 2002 (Comm) illustrates an important issue in relation to interest.  If a successful party has a contractual right to interest, but has not pleaded that…

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: THE "TRAP FOR THE UNWARY" AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

LATE SERVICE OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: THE “TRAP FOR THE UNWARY” AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS

June 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Serving documents

In Altiatech Ltd v Birmingham City Council [2023] EWHC 1371 (TCC) Mr Justice Waksman considered the position when a claimant served the Particulars of Claim late.  The judgement refers to a specific rules in relation to procurement.  However the point…

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE - BUT WITH A DIFFERENCE: ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIM FORM CONTAINED NO FACTS AT ALL

ANOTHER CLAIM FORM CASE – BUT WITH A DIFFERENCE: ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIM FORM CONTAINED NO FACTS AT ALL

April 13, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In  Free Leisure Ltd (t/a “Cirque Le Soir”) v Peidl And Company Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 792 (Comm) Charles Hollander KC, sitting as a High Court judge considered the appropriate course when the “facts” section of the claim form…

THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE  ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED

THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED

March 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

There is a breach statement in the judgment of Lady Justice Andrews in Zanatta v Metroline Travel Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 224 that highlights a crucial point in relation to the drafting of a Reply. Whereas a Reply and Defence…

SERVICE ON A SOLICITOR WAS NOT DEFECTIVE: WHAT IS MEANT BY A "PLACE OF BUSINESS"?

SERVICE ON A SOLICITOR WAS NOT DEFECTIVE: WHAT IS MEANT BY A “PLACE OF BUSINESS”?

March 6, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Ellison Road Ltd v Mian (t/a HKH Kenwright & Cox Solicitors) & Anor [2023] EWHC 375 (Ch) Master Brightwell rejected a defendant’s argument that he had not been properly served at his “place of business”.  The case shows the…

CLAIMANT SOUGHT TO AMEND NAME OF THE DEFENDANT: CLAIM STRUCK OUT: ANOTHER PERIL OF TRAVEL LITIGATION

CLAIMANT SOUGHT TO AMEND NAME OF THE DEFENDANT: CLAIM STRUCK OUT: ANOTHER PERIL OF TRAVEL LITIGATION

February 10, 2023 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to  barrister Katherine Howells for sending me a copy of the decision of Deputy District Judge Causton in Gregory -v- TUI Airways Ltd, a copy of that decision is available here  Approved Judgment Gregory v TUI.     …

PROVING THINGS 246: WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE MATCHES NEITHER THE PLEADINGS NOR THE CONTEMPORARY RECORDS

PROVING THINGS 246: WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE MATCHES NEITHER THE PLEADINGS NOR THE CONTEMPORARY RECORDS

January 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

We are looking again at the judgment in Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 from a slightly different stance. The appeal was about QOCS and setting aside a notice of discontinuance. However the process that led…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM

January 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, QOCS

In  Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 the Court of Appeal rejected the defendant’s appeal, which was an attempt to subvert the principles of Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”).  The claimant discontinued the action…

YOU CAN'T RAISE A NEW CLAIM IN A RESPONSE TO A PART 18 REQUEST: THE PLEADED CASE REMAINS IMPORTANT

YOU CAN’T RAISE A NEW CLAIM IN A RESPONSE TO A PART 18 REQUEST: THE PLEADED CASE REMAINS IMPORTANT

July 22, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Costa v DissociaDID Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1934 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon rejected the defendants’ attempt to argue points that were not pleaded.  The only time an issue had been raised was in response to Part 18 requests.   This…

HIGH COURT ISSUES A WARNING TO THOSE PLEADING CLAIM FOR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES: THERE MUST BE A PROPER BASIS FOR SUCH A PLEA

HIGH COURT ISSUES A WARNING TO THOSE PLEADING CLAIM FOR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES: THERE MUST BE A PROPER BASIS FOR SUCH A PLEA

April 14, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Underwood & Anor v Bounty UK Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 888 (QB) Mr Justice Nicklin sent out a warning about the pleading a claim for exemplary damages. Such claims should only be made where there is a proper…

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS REFUSAL TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: "THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH IS NO EMPTY FORMALITY"

COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS REFUSAL TO ALLOW DEFENDANTS TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSIONS: “THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH IS NO EMPTY FORMALITY”

February 25, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth

In Clarkson v Future Resources FZE & Ors [2022] EWCA Civ 230 the Court of Appeal upheld a judge’s decision not to allow the defendants permission to withdraw an admission.  It is an important reminder of the quality of the…

PLEADINGS, APPEALS AND THE DROP OF A HAMMER:  A HIGH COURT DECISION

PLEADINGS, APPEALS AND THE DROP OF A HAMMER: A HIGH COURT DECISION

February 23, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In SPS Groundworks & Building Ltd v Mahil [2022] EWHC 371 (QB) Mr Justice Cotter reiterated the point that statements of case are important. Any issue as to the scope of the pleadings should be determined at the outset of…

PLEADING A DEFENCE: THE DIFFICULT STATUS OF A "NON-ADMISSION": (SOMETHING ABOUT RE-USING WITNESS STATEMENTS TOO)

PLEADING A DEFENCE: THE DIFFICULT STATUS OF A “NON-ADMISSION”: (SOMETHING ABOUT RE-USING WITNESS STATEMENTS TOO)

February 17, 2022 · by gexall · in Case Management, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

In Cardiff City Football Club (Holdings) Ltd, Re [2022] EWHC 322 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson found himself deciding matters relating to the pleading of the action, the scope of the trial and the admissibility of witness evidence on the…

STATEMENTS OF CASE, DRAFTING, DANGERS AND PITFALLS 2022: FORTHCOMING WEBINAR

STATEMENTS OF CASE, DRAFTING, DANGERS AND PITFALLS 2022: FORTHCOMING WEBINAR

January 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Case, Webinar

Recently we have looked at several cases where the importance of proper pleading was emphasises. For instance in Charles Russell Speechlys LLP v Beneficial House (Birmingham) Regeneration LLP [2021] EWHC 3458 (QB) the appeal was allowed, and the matter remitted…

APPLICATIONS TO AMEND: TOWER BLOCKS, FIRE SAFETY AND "FACTS" PLEADED IN THE DEFENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

APPLICATIONS TO AMEND: TOWER BLOCKS, FIRE SAFETY AND “FACTS” PLEADED IN THE DEFENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Mulalley & Co. Ltd v Martlet Homes Ltd [2022] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that a claimant, seeking to amend its Particulars of Claim by referring to matters pleaded in the defence, was pleading…

YOU CAN'T RAISE A TOTALLY NEW POINT ON APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DOES NOT ALLOW A MAJOR CHANGE OF CASE

YOU CAN’T RAISE A TOTALLY NEW POINT ON APPEAL: COURT OF APPEAL DOES NOT ALLOW A MAJOR CHANGE OF CASE

January 19, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  London Borough of Brent v Johnson [2022] EWCA Civ 28 the Court of Appeal set out the difficulties for a party that wishes to take a fundamentally new or different point on appeal.  This gives rise to major difficulties…

"A SOLICITOR, NO MATTER HOW EXPERIENCED OR INEXPERIENCED, MUST BE TAKEN TO KNOW THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES"

“A SOLICITOR, NO MATTER HOW EXPERIENCED OR INEXPERIENCED, MUST BE TAKEN TO KNOW THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES”

December 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Webinar

That quotation, taken from  the judgment of HHJ Bird in  Holterman v Electrium (2020) EWHC 3915 ( TCC) was chosen by Professor Dominic Regan as his “thought of the year” in a recent tweet. Since there are 3208 pages in…

NEVER MIND THE... AMENDMENTS.... HERE'S THE SEX PISTOLS: JOHNNY ROTTEN WAS TOO FAR BEHIND THE BEAT...

NEVER MIND THE… AMENDMENTS…. HERE’S THE SEX PISTOLS: JOHNNY ROTTEN WAS TOO FAR BEHIND THE BEAT…

August 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  Jones & Anor v Lydon & Ors [2021] EWHC 2322 (Ch) Sir Anthony Mann refused an application for late amendment of the pleadings.  A Note explaining the nature of the case cannot be used as a substitute for a…

STATEMENTS OF CASE: A REPLY CANNOT BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

STATEMENTS OF CASE: A REPLY CANNOT BE INCONSISTENT WITH THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

August 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  R5 Capital Ltd v Mitheridge Capital Management LLP [2021] EWHC 2316 (Ch) Deputy Master Raeburn highlighted the fact that the rules do not allow a Reply to be, or to appear to be, contradictory to the case set out…

PLEADING A CASE WHERE "DISCREDITABLE CONDUCT" IS ALLEGED: THE DEFENDANT MUST KNOW THE CASE THEY HAVE TO MEET

PLEADING A CASE WHERE “DISCREDITABLE CONDUCT” IS ALLEGED: THE DEFENDANT MUST KNOW THE CASE THEY HAVE TO MEET

July 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Case

The judgment of Mr Justice Bryan in Lakatamia Shipping Co Ltd v Su & Ors [2021] EWHC 1907 (Comm) could be used as a textbook for several important issues of civil procedure and civil evidence.   Here we look at that…

DEFENDANTS' APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS REFUSED: NO EVIDENCE THAT DEFENCE WAS NOT CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BY THE LEGAL ADVISERS WITH THE DEFENDANTS

DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATION TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS REFUSED: NO EVIDENCE THAT DEFENCE WAS NOT CAREFULLY CONSIDERED BY THE LEGAL ADVISERS WITH THE DEFENDANTS

May 24, 2021 · by gexall · in Admissions, Amendment, Applications, Members Content

The judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Financial Conduct Authority v Skinner & Ors [2019] EWHC 392 has only recently arrived on BAILLI. It is an example of the court refusing to allow a party to withdraw from admissions.  The…

CLAIMANT WAS NOT FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: TO WHAT EXTENT CAN A DEFENDANT EXPLORE "PERIPHERAL" MATTERS WHEN MAKING ASSERTIONS OF DISHONESTY?

CLAIMANT WAS NOT FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: TO WHAT EXTENT CAN A DEFENDANT EXPLORE “PERIPHERAL” MATTERS WHEN MAKING ASSERTIONS OF DISHONESTY?

May 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

In Long v Elegant Resorts Ltd [2021] EWHC 1330 (QB)HHJ Pearce (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered, and rejected, an argument that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest.  In fact the claimant beat his own Part 36…

DEFENDANT NOT PERMITTED TO PLEAD FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ON A SPECULATIVE OR CONTINGENT BASIS

DEFENDANT NOT PERMITTED TO PLEAD FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ON A SPECULATIVE OR CONTINGENT BASIS

April 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2021] EWHC 846 (QB) Master Davison refused a defendant’s application to amend its defence to plead fundamental dishonesty on a “contingent” basis.  The judgment deals with important issues as to how a defendant must…

WHEN YOUR PLEADED CASE IS DIFFERENT TO YOUR EVIDENCE: YOU ARE TAKING A HUGE GAMBLE (WHICH DIDN'T PAY OFF...)

WHEN YOUR PLEADED CASE IS DIFFERENT TO YOUR EVIDENCE: YOU ARE TAKING A HUGE GAMBLE (WHICH DIDN’T PAY OFF…)

February 19, 2021 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

The judgment of Gavin Mansfield QC (sitting as a High Court judge)  in Puharic v Silverbond Enterprises Ltd [2021] EWHC 351 (QB) highlights the difficulties that can occur if the pleaded case differs from the evidence. Put bluntly running a…

REPLIES TO DEFENCES: WHY AND WHEN...

REPLIES TO DEFENCES: WHY AND WHEN…

February 17, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

A post yesterday made me think that this is an opportune time to re-visit the function of the Reply in litigation. I am here concerned only with a Reply to a Defence which is, essentially voluntary, not a Defence to…

YOU CANNOT USE A REPLY TO PLEAD MATTERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

YOU CANNOT USE A REPLY TO PLEAD MATTERS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

February 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

About ten minutes ago I sent off the material for a webinar I am giving tomorrow on drafting statements of case. Inevitably, therefore, a new and relevant case arrived on BAILLI* [the material was subsequently amended to include this] . …

STATEMENTS OF CASE, DRAFTING, DANGERS AND PITFALLS: WEBINAR 17th FEBRUARY 2021

STATEMENTS OF CASE, DRAFTING, DANGERS AND PITFALLS: WEBINAR 17th FEBRUARY 2021

February 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Webinar

I am giving a webinar on the 17th February 2021 on avoiding problems with Statements of Case. This is part series of webinars on the theme of “staying safe” in the running of personal injury cases. The webinars look at…

SUING A CLAIMANT WHO HAS ACCEPTED A PART 36 OFFER: THE PROFOUND PROBLEMS WHEN PLEADING FRAUD: YOU CAN'T "WAIT AND SEE"

SUING A CLAIMANT WHO HAS ACCEPTED A PART 36 OFFER: THE PROFOUND PROBLEMS WHEN PLEADING FRAUD: YOU CAN’T “WAIT AND SEE”

January 28, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Statements of Case

There is an interesting history in the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in in Kasem v University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2021] EWHC 136 (QB).  It is a case that is an object lesson in the stringent requirements…

CLAIMANT'S CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE IT SAID TWO CONTRADICTORY THINGS: "JANUS-FACED" PLEADINGS NOT ALLOWED

CLAIMANT’S CASE STRUCK OUT BECAUSE IT SAID TWO CONTRADICTORY THINGS: “JANUS-FACED” PLEADINGS NOT ALLOWED

November 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

The judgment of Mr Justice Marcus Smith in Betesh Partnership -v- Evans [2020] EWHC 1589 (QB) contains interesting observations on the need for a claimant to plead a case that is not inconsistent.  I am working and citing  from the…

IF YOU FIGHT AN "ALL OR NOTHING CASE" THEN YOU CAN'T COMPLAIN IF YOU GET NOTHING

IF YOU FIGHT AN “ALL OR NOTHING CASE” THEN YOU CAN’T COMPLAIN IF YOU GET NOTHING

October 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Statements of Case

In  Amin v Amin & Ors [2020] EWHC 2675 (Ch)  Mr Justice Nugee made an important observation about the way in which parties present their case.  It may benefit some litigants to put their case on an alternative basis. THE…

"LITIGANTS SHOULD BE TERRIFIED IF THEY LIE TO THE COURT": THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH

“LITIGANTS SHOULD BE TERRIFIED IF THEY LIE TO THE COURT”: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH

October 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Statements of Truth

There are many, many cases about committal proceedings in commercial cases.  Some judges have observed that they appear to be used tactically.   Most are confined to their own facts. However in North of England Coachworks Ltd v Khan [2020] EWHC…

GOT TO DRAFT A DEFENCE? SOME HELPFUL GUIDANCE FROM OUR CANADIAN COUSINS

GOT TO DRAFT A DEFENCE? SOME HELPFUL GUIDANCE FROM OUR CANADIAN COUSINS

September 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Case, Useful links

  There is relatively little guidance given on the process involved in drafting a defence.  There is some useful help given the the Law Society of Ontario Practice Area Resource “How to Prepare a Statement of Defence”. Some of this…

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES STRUCK OUT: APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED: CLAIMANT FAILED TO USE THEIR LOAF AS CLAIM IS SLICED...

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES STRUCK OUT: APPLICATION TO AMEND REFUSED: CLAIMANT FAILED TO USE THEIR LOAF AS CLAIM IS SLICED…

September 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Damages, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

The judgment of Mrs Justice Jefford in The Leicester Bakery (Holdings) Ltd v Ridge And Partners LLP [2020] EWHC 2430 (TCC) shows the necessity of being able to particularise a claim for damages. What it demonstrates is that, in claims…

"WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL" ? A SEARCH TERM THAT COMES UP FREQUENTLY

“WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A NON-ADMISSION AND A DENIAL” ? A SEARCH TERM THAT COMES UP FREQUENTLY

August 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Members Content, Statements of Case, Webinar

On the 3rd September 2020 I am presenting a webinar on Pleadings (Statements of Case) for Personal Injury Lawyers. One of the issues being looked at is drafting a defence. One of the regular search terms that lead to this…

ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT BECAUSE ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH AND WILFUL MISCONDUCT NOT FULLY PARTICULARISED

ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT BECAUSE ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH AND WILFUL MISCONDUCT NOT FULLY PARTICULARISED

July 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Summary judgment

In Palladian Partners LP & Ors v The Republic of Argentina & Anor [2020] EWHC 1946 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill refused to strike out pleadings alleging, bad faith, wilful misconduct and manifest error.  This is the second example recently of…

PLEADING (STATEMENTS OF CASE) FOR PERSONAL INJURY LAWYERS (LIVE WEBINAR) 3rd SEPTEMBER 2020

July 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Webinar

The discussion of statements of case yesterday in the case of  Tejani v Fitzroy Place Residential Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1856 (TCC) has led, almost directly, to a webinar on statements of case.   I am giving a webinar on the…

THE STATEMENT OF CASE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: JUDGE PROVIDES A LESSON IN THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PLEADING

THE STATEMENT OF CASE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: JUDGE PROVIDES A LESSON IN THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF PLEADING

July 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Tejani v Fitzroy Place Residential Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1856 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall sent out a clear reminder of the basic purpose of pleading. He rejected an argument by the defendant that a particulars of claim should…

COVID REPEATS 48: REPLIES AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: A PRIMER

COVID REPEATS 48: REPLIES AND DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: A PRIMER

June 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Default judgment,, Members Content, Statements of Case

Today we are taking a look back at what turned out to be the second most read post on this blog in 2016. The basic rules about when to file a Reply and, more importantly, a defence to counterclaim. A…

CLAIM STRUCK OUT FOR INADEQUATE PLEADING: ENOUGH TO MAKE YOU HIT THE BOTTLE

CLAIM STRUCK OUT FOR INADEQUATE PLEADING: ENOUGH TO MAKE YOU HIT THE BOTTLE

May 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

I don’t normally write about the cases relating to defamation and pleading, this is a very niche area and there is usually little of general interest. However the judgment of Mr Justice Nicol in  BrewDog Plc & Anor v Frank…

THE IMPORTANCE OF STATEMENTS OF CASE: THE TRIAL SHOULD NOT BECOME A "FREE FOR ALL": COURT OF APPEAL SENDS OUT A WARNING

THE IMPORTANCE OF STATEMENTS OF CASE: THE TRIAL SHOULD NOT BECOME A “FREE FOR ALL”: COURT OF APPEAL SENDS OUT A WARNING

May 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Dhillon v Barclays Bank Plc & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 619 the Court of Appeal reiterated the importance of statements of case in relation to civil litigation.  The statements of case should define the issues at trial.   “It…

"STATEMENTS OF CASE PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN CIVIL LITIGATION WHICH SHOULD NOT BE DIMINISHED": THE COURT OF APPEAL AND THE LEARNING ACADEMY

“STATEMENTS OF CASE PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN CIVIL LITIGATION WHICH SHOULD NOT BE DIMINISHED”: THE COURT OF APPEAL AND THE LEARNING ACADEMY

March 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In November 2018 I wrote about the decision of HHJ Klein in  UK Learning Academy Ltd v The Secretary of State for Education [2018] EWHC 2915 (Comm). An appeal from that judgment has been heard, and dismissed, by the Court of Appeal. …

THAT IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN A "NON-ADMISSION" AND A DENIAL IN A DEFENCE:  THE KEY CASES CONSIDERED

THAT IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN A “NON-ADMISSION” AND A DENIAL IN A DEFENCE: THE KEY CASES CONSIDERED

March 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The discussion yesterday of the decision in Aven & Ors v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd [2020] EWHC 523 (QB) gives rise to review  cases on pleading a defence, in particular the  important distinction between a “denial” and a “non-admission”. It is…

PLEADING A DEFENCE PROPERLY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DENIAL AND A NON-ADMISSION: HIGH COURT GOES BACK TO BASIC PRINCIPLES

PLEADING A DEFENCE PROPERLY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DENIAL AND A NON-ADMISSION: HIGH COURT GOES BACK TO BASIC PRINCIPLES

March 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Members Content, Statements of Case

There are some interesting observations about statements of case in the judgment of Mr Justice Warby in  Aven & Ors v Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd [2020] EWHC 523 (QB).  This case emphasises the difference between a non-admission and a denial…

← Previous 1 2 3 4 5 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • 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”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • 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"
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE "OPINION" EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014

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.