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 6

PLEADINGS SHOULD CONTAIN FACTS NOT ARGUMENT OR RHETORIC

March 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

There have been a surprising number of occasions recently where judges have had to draw attention to the basic principles of pleadings. Pleading are for facts, nor argument or “rhetoric”.  Another example can be seen in the judgment of Sir…

IT IS NOT THAT EASY TO WITHDRAW AN ADMISSION: McWILLIAM -v- NORTON FINANCE

March 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In McWilliam -v- Norton Finance [2015] EWCA Civ 186 the Court of Appeal made some important observations in relation to admissions and the withdrawal of admissions. THE CASE The claimant was suing the defendant for secret commissions. The defendant argued…

PLEADINGS MUST BE CONCISE – OR ELSE! TOO MANY COUNSEL SPOILING THE BROTH?

February 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

We have looked before at problems caused by over-lengthy pleadings.  In Vincent Aziz Tchenguiz -v- Grant Thornton UK LLP [2015] EWHC 405 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt provides a virtual “cut out and keep” set of warnings of the dangers of not complying…

OVER-LENGTHY PLEADINGS SOME EXAMPLES AND SOME LESSONS

December 16, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The recent post on the Court of Appeal upholding a decision not to grant permission for over-elaborate particulars of claim has led to some comments on the length of pleadings (“229 paragraph Particulars of Claim” “I’ve got 32 page prof…

BACK TO BASICS WITH PLEADINGS: PROPORTIONATE LITIGATION AND BREVITY ESSENTIAL ON APPEALS

December 11, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

“Pleadings are intended to help the Court and the parties. In recent years practitioners have, on occasion, lost sight of that aim. Documents are drafted of interminable length and diffuseness and conspicuous lack of precision, which are often destined never…

IRRELEVANT EVIDENCE, INFERENCES AND "FORGERY": EVIDENTIAL ISSUES IN A HIGH COURT CASE

October 19, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The decision of Mr Justice Norris in Redstone Mortgages Ltd -v- B Legal Ltd [2014]EWHC 3390 (Ch) deals with several important issues relating to evidence in civil cases. In particular the relevance and admissibility of “quasi expert” evidence and the…

PLEAD A DEFENCE PROPERLY OR BE STRUCK OUT: A HIGH COURT CASE CONSIDERED

October 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

The case of De Vere Holding Company -v- Belgravia Wealth Management KFT & Ors [2014] (QBD Judge Parkes QC) 15/10/14 was briefly reported on Lawtel today. It contains important observations on the role of pleadings. (This post is based on…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, VERY LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AND DOCUMENTS: A DECISION TODAY

October 13, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Witness statements

The judgment of the Hon Mrs Justice Asplin DBE given today in Lictor Anstalt -v- MIR Steel UK Ltd [2014] EWHC 3316 (Ch) contained a consideration of the Denton criteria in relation to late service of witness evidence and documents….

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: STATEMENTS OF ISSUES; PLEADING AND PROOF

October 12, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

The decision of Mr Justice Walker in Burrows -v- Northumbrian Walker Ltd [2014] EWHC 3305(QB) considers the need for clarity in written submission and for the issues the judge is asked to determine to be clearly defined. It also considers…

VERY, VERY LATE APPLICATION TO AMEND PARTICULARS OF CLAIM ALLOWED

October 8, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In MacLeod -v- Mears [2014] EWHC 3140 QB Mr Justice Hamblen allowed the claimant to amend the particulars of claim very late, after a trial in fact.  THE FACTS The claimant brought an action alleging a failure to pay a…

PLEADING AND PROVING ALLEGATIONS OF FRAUD OR DISHONESTY: MULLARKE -v- BROAD: USEFUL LINKS AND GUIDANCE

October 2, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Written advocacy

Great care needs to be taken in pleading allegations of fraud or dishonesty.  In particular the pleader needs to be sure that there is sufficient evidence to justify the pleading.  This was considered in some detail by Lewison J in…

LIMITATION IN A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM: DATE OF ACCRUAL; LATENT DAMAGE AND AMENDING UNDER CPR 17.4.(2): A CASE IN POINT

September 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Interface Europe Ltd -v- Premier Hanks Dyers Ltd [2014] EWHC 2610 (QB) Judge Saffman (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the issue of the relevant date of accrual of a cause of action in a breach…

WHAT CAN THE DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES AFTER A DEFAULT JUDGMENT 2: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

July 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

We have looked before at the question of what a defendant can argue in relation to damages after a judgment has been entered. A case reported today examines this issue in relation to judgment in a clinical negligence action. SYMES -V-…

AMENDING PLEADINGS: HAS THE LIMITATION PERIOD EXPIRED? WHERE DOES THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIE?

July 17, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case

The Court of Appeal decision today in Mercer -v- Ballinger [2014] EWCA Civ 996 may appear to be an issue of esoteric civil procedure.  However the decision is an important one with far-ranging  practical consequences for a party seeking to…

PLEADING A DEFENCE PROPERLY: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A "NON-ADMISSION" & A "DENIAL" EXPLORED

July 12, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The decision of Mr Justice Bean in Dil -v- Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2014] EWHC 2184 (QB)  relates to a police force’s obligations in relation to the disclosure of details of undercover operations and informers.  However it also deals…

“FAILING TO SEE THE WOOD FOR THE TREES” AND LATE APPLICATIONS TO AMEND PLEADINGS : GROARKE –V- FONTAINE CONSIDERED

May 23, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Groarke –v- Fontaine [2014] EWHC 1679 (QB) centred on a Road Traffic Accident that happened in November 2009.  The central issue on appeal was whether a late application to amend the defence to plead contributory negligence should have been allowed….

PLEADING MITIGATION OF LOSS: WHY THE PRACTICE DIRECTION IS (ALMOST ALWAYS) WRONG AND THE RULES ARE A SHAMBLES

May 4, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

It is well established law that the burden of proving a failure to mitigate loss lies with the defendant.   It is for the defendant to establish that the claimant failed to act reasonably.  Somewhat surprisingly a Practice Direction in…

← Previous 1 … 5 6

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

  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AVOIDING NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS IN LITIGATION AN 8 POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE (AUGUST 2019): AND LOOK AT THE LINKS…
  • EXPERT WATCH 66: RED FLAGS AND EXPERTS (1) :THE DUTY TO CONSIDER THE RANGE OF OPINIONS: OFTEN “HONOURED IN THE BREACH”; OFTEN FATAL TO A PARTY’S CASE
  • EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY “WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT” TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
  • ANOTHER INTERESTING DISCUSSION (ABOUT INTEREST…): THE STARTING POINT IS THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO BE COMPENSATED FOR BEING OUT OF ITS MONEY (NO MATTER WHAT IT WOULD HAVE DONE WITH IT…)
  • WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS

Top Posts

EXPERT WATCH 65 : WHEN THE JUDGES SAY "WE ATTACH VERY LITTLE WEIGHT" TO A REPORT IT IS CLEAR THAT SOMETHING HAS GONE WRONG
COST BITES 435: £4 MILLION SPENT IN COSTS AND NEITHER PARTY WILL RECOVER A PENNY FROM THE OTHER: A "PYRHHIC" VICTORY LEADS TO NO ORDER FOR COSTS...
COST BITES 436: THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO BEAT THE CLAIMANT'S PART 36 OFFER: WAS IT UNJUST FOR THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES TO APPLY? THE IMPORTANCE OF INTEREST
A WIDOW CANNOT BRING AN ACTION UNDER THE FATAL ACCIDENTS ACT WHERE HER HUSBAND SETTLED THE PERSONAL INJURY ACTION AGAINST A CONCURRENT TORTFEASOR IN HIS LIFETIME
WHEN A COURT MAY MAKE NO ORDER FOR COSTS: THE FACTORS CONSIDERED: 12 KEY POINTS AND A USEFUL CHECKLIST FOR PRACTITIONERS

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