Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Striking out
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: COURT STRIKES OUT PARTS OF DEFENDANT'S WITNESS STATEMENT  AS NON COMPLIANT WITH PD57AC (AND THE DEFENDANT IS A BARRISTER...)

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: COURT STRIKES OUT PARTS OF DEFENDANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT AS NON COMPLIANT WITH PD57AC (AND THE DEFENDANT IS A BARRISTER…)

April 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

This case adds to the growing number of cases where the courts have considered whether a  witness statement breaches PD 57AC and the consequences for breach.  The  defendant’s initial statement contained numerous breaches of PD57. A revised statement was more…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 61: CLAIM FOR LIBEL WAS NOT PROPERLY PLEADED: "MUCH OF THIS ESSENTIAL DETAIL IS MISSING"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 61: CLAIM FOR LIBEL WAS NOT PROPERLY PLEADED: “MUCH OF THIS ESSENTIAL DETAIL IS MISSING”

March 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out, Summary judgment

As we shall see there are very strict and precise requirements for pleading libel.  There are numerous cases where the claimant has failed to get past the preliminary stages because of inadequate pleadings. We look at such a case here….

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 7: CLAIM FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY AS A RESULT OF BEING PRESENT AT BIRTH WAS STRUCK OUT: TESTING THE PARAMETERS OF PAUL -v- WOLVERHAMPTON

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 7: CLAIM FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY AS A RESULT OF BEING PRESENT AT BIRTH WAS STRUCK OUT: TESTING THE PARAMETERS OF PAUL -v- WOLVERHAMPTON

March 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Striking out

This case represents an attempt to sidestep the decision in Paul v Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust [2024] UKSC 1.  As we shall see it was not successful.  This is one of the first, if not the first, reported case since…

SERVICE POINTS 29: WOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT THE ACTION WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH A r. 7.7 NOTICE?

SERVICE POINTS 29: WOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT THE ACTION WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY WITH A r. 7.7 NOTICE?

March 3, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Extensions of time, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Statements of Case

It is unusual to see cases about the operation of CPR 7.7.  This rule allows a defendant to serve a notice requiring that a claim form be served.  In this case the claimant did not comply and the defendant applied…

ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPLICANT'S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER: (THIS MAY WAKE YOU UP ON A MONDAY MORNING...)

ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPLICANT’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER: (THIS MAY WAKE YOU UP ON A MONDAY MORNING…)

March 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Witness statements

Here we have a case, brought be a professional liquidator, which was struck out because of a failure to comply with a peremptory order as to disclosure.   It serves as an object lesson in the need to educate a client…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 58:  THE DEFENDANTS' PLEADING DID NOT CONTAIN AN "ADMISSION": APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMENDMENTS DISMISSED

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 58: THE DEFENDANTS’ PLEADING DID NOT CONTAIN AN “ADMISSION”: APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AMENDMENTS DISMISSED

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

This is a case where the court had to consider whether a defence had originally contained an “admission”  such that the defendants required express permission to resile from it.  The court found that, on close analysis, there was no such…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 55: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM CONTAINED A (SIGNIFICANTLY) FALSE FACT: JUDGE FINDS THAT THIS WAS PRINCIPALLY DUE TO THE FAULT OF "BARRISTER M"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 55: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM CONTAINED A (SIGNIFICANTLY) FALSE FACT: JUDGE FINDS THAT THIS WAS PRINCIPALLY DUE TO THE FAULT OF “BARRISTER M”

February 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth

It is rare for a judgment about pleadings to be “gripping” reading. We have such a case here. From the opening lines, to the detailed consideration of how the pleadings went wrong, the narrative is compelling. We even have an…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 53: THE HIGH COURT REJECTS AN ALLEGATION OF IMPROPER CONDUCT IN THE DRAFTING OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: A CLAIMANT CAN BE "TORMENTED" AND THIS IS NOT ABUSIVE...

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 53: THE HIGH COURT REJECTS AN ALLEGATION OF IMPROPER CONDUCT IN THE DRAFTING OF THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: A CLAIMANT CAN BE “TORMENTED” AND THIS IS NOT ABUSIVE…

February 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Striking out

We are looking at a judgment  that goes to the very heart of what a lawyer can  properly draft in relation to pleadings.  It considers what the line is between putting the case in an “effective and high level way”…

YOU HAVE TO PAY THE FULL COURT FEE: THE FACT THAT A COURT HAS ACCEPTED A FEE DOES NOT RENDER IT "FUNCTUS OFFICIO"

YOU HAVE TO PAY THE FULL COURT FEE: THE FACT THAT A COURT HAS ACCEPTED A FEE DOES NOT RENDER IT “FUNCTUS OFFICIO”

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content

Here we have an ingenious argument that a court could not claim a higher court fee. It was an ingenious argument that failed.  This shows the importance of claimants knowing the value of a case when they issued, and the…

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS NOT SIGNED BY AN AUTHORISED PERSON:  IT REQUIRES "FACTS" NOT INFORMATION: A SOLICITOR EMPLOYEE SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED IN THE NAME OF THE FIRM

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH WAS NOT SIGNED BY AN AUTHORISED PERSON: IT REQUIRES “FACTS” NOT INFORMATION: A SOLICITOR EMPLOYEE SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED IN THE NAME OF THE FIRM

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

Here we have an example of a Statement of Truth that was non-compliant it contained the wrong wording and was signed by the wrong person in the wrong way.   It shows the need to ensure that the rules in relation…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 49: THE COURT STRIKES OUT TWO HUNDRED PARAGRAPHS OF A REPLY

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 49: THE COURT STRIKES OUT TWO HUNDRED PARAGRAPHS OF A REPLY

January 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

We are looking at a case that has many procedural points of interest to litigators.  We are starting by looking at the judge’s observations on the claimants’ Reply which was described as “Defective” and large parts struck out.  There are…

CLAIMS AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEATHS ARISING FROM COVID WERE STRUCK OUT: CAUSATION COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED

CLAIMS AGAINST THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DEATHS ARISING FROM COVID WERE STRUCK OUT: CAUSATION COULD NOT BE ESTABLISHED

January 13, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

In this case, decided yesterday,  the court struck out the claimants’ case alleging that deaths were caused by, or materially contributed to, by the negligence of the defendant. The court had the important caveats in relation to the striking out…

WAS THIS "SECOND" ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

WAS THIS “SECOND” ACTION AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN MATTERS HAD HAD BEEN DETERMINED IN AN EARLIER HEARING? IF SO WHAT SHOULD THE COURT DO?

January 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

When a party is dissatisfied with the result of a hearing and has exhausted the appeal process there is often little they can do.  One potential remedy is to bring a second action seeking to set aside the first on…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 46:  THE DEFENDANT HAD AGREED THAT THE DEFENCE AS DRAFTED BROKE THE RULES

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 46: THE DEFENDANT HAD AGREED THAT THE DEFENCE AS DRAFTED BROKE THE RULES

January 9, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

We are looking at a case where we get a hint of a defence that was so defective that, ultimately, the defendant agreed it should be struck out and entirely repleaded.  It provides an object lesson on how a defence…

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES PERMISSION FOR APPELLANT TO AMEND PLEADINGS OR RELY ON NEW EVIDENCE: GET YOUR CASE TOGETHER BEFORE AN APPLICATION NOT AFTER IT...

COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES PERMISSION FOR APPELLANT TO AMEND PLEADINGS OR RELY ON NEW EVIDENCE: GET YOUR CASE TOGETHER BEFORE AN APPLICATION NOT AFTER IT…

January 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment, Witness statements

In this judgment today the Court of Appeal refused an application by an appellant to rely on amended Particulars of Claim or adduce new evidence in a case where the claim was struck out. The Court made the point that…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 45:   THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM SHOWED NO ARGUABLE CAUSE OF ACTION AND WERE STRUCK OUT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 45: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM SHOWED NO ARGUABLE CAUSE OF ACTION AND WERE STRUCK OUT

January 5, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Here we have an example of a case where the allegations against the proposed (Part 20) defendant were inadequately pleaded. So inadequate that the judge struck out the particulars and refused the applicant’s permission to rely on amended particulars (which…

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 7: STATEMENTS OF CASE ON THIS BLOG: MATTERS OF THE PLEADING OBVIOUS

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 7: STATEMENTS OF CASE ON THIS BLOG: MATTERS OF THE PLEADING OBVIOUS

December 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

The “Current importance of Pleadings” series started in March of this year.  It is another one of those issues that has featured heavily throughout. Being able to focus on “pleading” issues in a particular series has been useful.  The problems…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 44: COUNTERCLAIM WAS "INADEQUATELY PLEADED AND ABUSIVE": DEFENDANT FAILED TO PROPERLY PARTICULARISE ITS CASE

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 44: COUNTERCLAIM WAS “INADEQUATELY PLEADED AND ABUSIVE”: DEFENDANT FAILED TO PROPERLY PARTICULARISE ITS CASE

December 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

This is a case where the judge agreed with a submission that the counterclaim was “inadequately pleaded and abusive”.  The judge held that there was no need to formally strike it out, it failed in any event.  There are lessons…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 43: SHOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT A DEFENCE THAT RELIES ON "FOREIGN ILLEGALITY"? WHAT DETAIL IS NEEDED?

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 43: SHOULD THE COURT STRIKE OUT A DEFENCE THAT RELIES ON “FOREIGN ILLEGALITY”? WHAT DETAIL IS NEEDED?

December 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

This case considers the matters that a defendant must plead if it wants to rely on a defence of “foreign illegality”. That is the claim should not succeed because some of the matters were (allegedly) unlawful in a foreign jurisdiction. …

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 38: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM IN A £3,000,000 CLAIM STRUCK OUT:  THE COURT USES A "CARROT AND STICK" APPROACH TO DEFECTIVE PLEADINGS

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 38: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM IN A £3,000,000 CLAIM STRUCK OUT: THE COURT USES A “CARROT AND STICK” APPROACH TO DEFECTIVE PLEADINGS

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In this case the judge decided that the claimant’s pleaded case was so defective that the entire Particulars of Claim needed to be struck out.  It is a working example of how pleadings need to be compliant and cannot be…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 37: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM STRUCK OUT: THEY "FAIL TO FULFIL ANY OF THE REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED FOR, AND PURPOSES TO BE SERVED BY, PARTICULARS OF CLAIM"

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 37: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM STRUCK OUT: THEY “FAIL TO FULFIL ANY OF THE REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED FOR, AND PURPOSES TO BE SERVED BY, PARTICULARS OF CLAIM”

November 18, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In this case the claimants claimed £292,806,729,326,976,872,097,543,994.24,(or alternatively £377,594,620,661.41.).  However the court held that their pleaded case did not comply with the rules, and it was not possible for the defendants to know the case they had to meet.  The…

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…

AS IT STARTS TO GET DARK: LAWYERS HALLOWEEN STORIES: DIGGING UP THE PAST...

AS IT STARTS TO GET DARK: LAWYERS HALLOWEEN STORIES: DIGGING UP THE PAST…

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions, Well being

Way back in the mists of antiquity (2017) I invited lawyers on Twitter (Now “X”) to share their views on what scares the legal profession most.  The first post came from Megan Boyd (based in Atlanta, Georgia).  This shows that…

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH A STATUTORY OBLIGATION TO OBTAIN PERMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUE LEADS TO AN ACTION BEING A NULLITY

October 31, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking here at at case where an action was struck out because of  a failure to obtain permission of the court to issue proceedings. The judge rejected the claimant’s contention that the statute in question should be read…

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…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 33: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS STRIKING OUT OF SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES: "OVER-COMPLICATED", "UNCLEAR". "LACKING IN THE MOST BASIC INFORMATION NECESSARY" (OH AND MANY OF THE CLAIMS WERE UNPLEADED...)

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 33: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS STRIKING OUT OF SCHEDULE OF DAMAGES: “OVER-COMPLICATED”, “UNCLEAR”. “LACKING IN THE MOST BASIC INFORMATION NECESSARY” (OH AND MANY OF THE CLAIMS WERE UNPLEADED…)

October 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Schedules, Striking out

It is rare for a schedule of damages to come under close scrutiny prior to the trial itself.   Here the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out large parts of the appellants’ claim for damages.  Many of the…

MAZUR MATTERS 15: COULD BREACHES OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT? WHY YOU SHOULDN'T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ

MAZUR MATTERS 15: COULD BREACHES OF THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT LEAD TO AN ACTION BEING STRUCK OUT? WHY YOU SHOULDN’T BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ

October 13, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

I have gently, perhaps too gently, suggested that a great deal of what is being written and said about the impact of Mazur is “unhelpful”.  Put more bluntly some of it is inaccurate and misleading.  There is much “wishful thinking”…

IT WOULD BE AN "AFFRONT TO JUSTICE" NOT TO SET ASIDE THIS "FINAL" JUDGMENT: THERE IS A LOT HERE THAT EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE LITIGATION PROCESS SHOULD PROBABLY READ

IT WOULD BE AN “AFFRONT TO JUSTICE” NOT TO SET ASIDE THIS “FINAL” JUDGMENT: THERE IS A LOT HERE THAT EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE LITIGATION PROCESS SHOULD PROBABLY READ

September 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment

We are looking at a number of cases that, on the face of it, are highly unusual. One judge has already indicated that there is a strong prima facie cases that some related cases  “are all fraudulent”.    There are…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 29: THE DUTIES INVOLVED WHEN PLEADING FRAUD: CLAIMANT'S ALLEGATIONS THAT WERE "MORE CONSISTENT WITH HONESTY" ON THE PART OF THE DEFENDANT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 29: THE DUTIES INVOLVED WHEN PLEADING FRAUD: CLAIMANT’S ALLEGATIONS THAT WERE “MORE CONSISTENT WITH HONESTY” ON THE PART OF THE DEFENDANT

August 15, 2025 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

Here we are looking at a case where the claimant applied for permission to amend its Particulars so it could plead fraud. The application was refused.  It is a reminder of the onerous duties on a party when proposing to…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 27: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: (SOME POINTS OF IMPORTANCE FOR NON CLIN-NEG LAWYERS HERE AS WELL).

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 27: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INADEQUATE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM: (SOME POINTS OF IMPORTANCE FOR NON CLIN-NEG LAWYERS HERE AS WELL).

August 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Striking out

Anyone drafting, or contemplating drafting, a pleading in a clinical negligence claim (indeed any type of claim) would be best advised to read, in detail, the judgment we are considering today.  The judge went through an amended Particulars of Claim…

ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY PROPERLY WITH AN UNLESS ORDER FOR DETAILS OF FUNDING: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE CLAIMANT FAILED TO COMPLY PROPERLY WITH AN UNLESS ORDER FOR DETAILS OF FUNDING: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

July 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

Here we look at a case where the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that the claimant had failed to comply with the terms of a peremptory order. The action was, therefore, struck out.  It is a salutary and important…

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…

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS (1): I'VE SUED THE WRONG DEFENDANT:  CAN THE COURT DO ANYTHING TO HELP?  FIRST OF (WHAT MAY WELL BE) A LONG RUNNING SERIES

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS (1): I’VE SUED THE WRONG DEFENDANT: CAN THE COURT DO ANYTHING TO HELP? FIRST OF (WHAT MAY WELL BE) A LONG RUNNING SERIES

June 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,

There is much to be said for starting a new (and what may well be a  long running) series looking at professional negligence cases, in particular the procedural and practical issues that arise.  Firstly, if (as here) it is a…

A COUNTERCLAIM WAS CORRECTLY STRUCK OUT AFTER A CLAIM WAS STRUCK OUT FOR DELAY: "APPROBATING", "REPROBATING" AND "TECHNICAL WAREHOUSING" CONSIDERED

A COUNTERCLAIM WAS CORRECTLY STRUCK OUT AFTER A CLAIM WAS STRUCK OUT FOR DELAY: “APPROBATING”, “REPROBATING” AND “TECHNICAL WAREHOUSING” CONSIDERED

June 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

Here we have a case where the defendant unsuccessfully appealed against the striking out of its counterclaim. The claimants had consented to the claim being struck out, on the defendant’s application,  due to undue delay in the action.  The defendant…

BANK'S CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITORS FOR "CAUSING LOSS BY UNLAWFUL MEANS" IS NOT STRUCK OUT, NOR ARE THE SOLICITORS GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT: A LOT TO THINK ABOUT HERE

BANK’S CLAIM AGAINST SOLICITORS FOR “CAUSING LOSS BY UNLAWFUL MEANS” IS NOT STRUCK OUT, NOR ARE THE SOLICITORS GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT: A LOT TO THINK ABOUT HERE

June 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment, Witness statements

We are looking at a judgment from today where a bank has brought a claim against a firm of solicitors arguing that they have caused the bank loss because of the number and nature of complaints made by the solicitors’…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 16: THE CASE AGAINST ALL REMAINING DEFENDANTS WAS STRUCK OUT: THE CLAIMANT CANNOT SIMPLY PLEAD "SOMEONE HERE" MUST BE TO BLAME

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 16: THE CASE AGAINST ALL REMAINING DEFENDANTS WAS STRUCK OUT: THE CLAIMANT CANNOT SIMPLY PLEAD “SOMEONE HERE” MUST BE TO BLAME

June 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out, Summary judgment

We are looking at a case where the court struck out the claimant’s case against three defendants because of the inadequate way in which the case was pleaded.  General assertions that someone here must be to blame were not sufficient.  The…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 13:  INAPPROPRIATE PLEADING OF FRAUD LEADS TO COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 13: INAPPROPRIATE PLEADING OF FRAUD LEADS TO COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS

May 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

I am not sure whether there are more cases about pleadings recently, or whether I am noticing them more having started this series.  However issues relating to statements of case keep arising. Here we look at a case where the…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 11: THE COURT WON'T STRIKE OUT PARTS OF THE DEFENCE BECAUSE... ITS ACTUALLY THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM THAT DON'T MAKE MUCH SENSE

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 11: THE COURT WON’T STRIKE OUT PARTS OF THE DEFENCE BECAUSE… ITS ACTUALLY THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM THAT DON’T MAKE MUCH SENSE

May 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

NB – SEE THE APPEAL JUDGMENT ON ONE ISSUE IN THIS CASE IN Prudence v Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] EWHC 96 (KB) Here we are looking at a judgment that is all about statements of case (or at…

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM UNDER THE ELECTRONIC PILOT: SERVICE  BY EMAIL OF AN ELECTRONICALLY SEALED COPY OF THE CLAIM FORM IS GOOD SERVICE

SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM UNDER THE ELECTRONIC PILOT: SERVICE BY EMAIL OF AN ELECTRONICALLY SEALED COPY OF THE CLAIM FORM IS GOOD SERVICE

May 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

CPR PD510 provides for the electronic issue of a claim form.   The claim form will be sealed electronically.  What are the consequences for service of the claim form when service takes place by email? This issue was considered (albeit on…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 8: "ASSERTED LOSS" DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND THE CLAIM WAS STRUCK OUT

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 8: “ASSERTED LOSS” DID NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES AND THE CLAIM WAS STRUCK OUT

May 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out, Summary judgment

We are looking at a case where the entire case was struck out on various grounds. The claimant did not attend the hearing to dispute the issues.  However I have isolated one ground of the judgment which relates to a…

JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: IT IS "INCOHERENT" AND OBSTRUCTS THE JUST DISPOSAL OF THE CLAIM

JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: IT IS “INCOHERENT” AND OBSTRUCTS THE JUST DISPOSAL OF THE CLAIM

April 30, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Schedules, Summary judgment

It is an easy matter for a claimant to insert a claim for a substantial loss of earnings into a schedule of damages.  However a claimant then has to prove that loss. Further, even prior to trial, a defendant is…

COURT WAS CORRECT TO REFUSE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHO WAS IN DEFAULT (OH, AND THE PROCEEDINGS HAD NEVER BEEN SERVED PROPERLY ANYWAY...)

COURT WAS CORRECT TO REFUSE TO GRANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHO WAS IN DEFAULT (OH, AND THE PROCEEDINGS HAD NEVER BEEN SERVED PROPERLY ANYWAY…)

March 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

In Lumsden v Charles [2025] EWCC 7 HHJ Peter Marquand refused a claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. The claimant had issued Part 8 proceedings but failed to serve the witness evidence and particulars with the proceedings by the rules. …

THE COURT DOES NOT HAVE POWER TO STRIKE OUT AN ORDER FOR AN ACCOUNT: AN APPLICATION THAT WAS "ILL JUDGED" AND "PUT FORWARD UNDER A JURISDICTION WHICH THE COURT PLAINLY DOES NOT HAVE"

THE COURT DOES NOT HAVE POWER TO STRIKE OUT AN ORDER FOR AN ACCOUNT: AN APPLICATION THAT WAS “ILL JUDGED” AND “PUT FORWARD UNDER A JURISDICTION WHICH THE COURT PLAINLY DOES NOT HAVE”

February 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

In  Hubbard & Anor v Hubbard & Anor [2024] EWHC 3123 (Ch) Master Marsh (sitting in retirement) rejected a defendant’s application to strike out a claim for an account and for summary judgment for the defendant.  The court had no…

FAILING TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM IS NOT AN "ABUSE OF PROCESS" SO AS TO LEAD TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

FAILING TO SERVE THE CLAIM FORM IS NOT AN “ABUSE OF PROCESS” SO AS TO LEAD TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, QOCS

We are returning to the decision of the Court of Appeal in Court of Appeal in Birley & Anor v Heritage Independent Living Ltd [2025] EWCA Civ 44. The Court upheld a finding that the failure to serve the claim form, or…

AN APPLICATION - AND ORDER -  FOR A STAY OF PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT LEAD TO TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM BEING EXTENDED: A POINT TO WATCH

AN APPLICATION – AND ORDER – FOR A STAY OF PROCEEDINGS DOES NOT LEAD TO TIME FOR SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM BEING EXTENDED: A POINT TO WATCH

January 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form

It was possible that we could get to the end of January without a claim form case being reported. It was, however, unlikely.  A failure to serve was one of the many issues considered by the Court of Appeal in…

BITCOINS IN THE TIP: DEFENDANT COUNCIL GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENT ON LIMITATION DESCRIBED AS "DESPERATE"

BITCOINS IN THE TIP: DEFENDANT COUNCIL GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT ON LIMITATION DESCRIBED AS “DESPERATE”

January 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Limitation, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

In Howells v Newport City Council [2025] EWHC 22 (Ch) HHJ Keyser KC granted summary judgment to the defendant council in an unusual case. The claimant was seeking to recover a computer hard drive which had been put in the…

CLAIM WAS ISSUED PROPERLY IN THE HIGH COURT, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SENT TO THE WRONG OFFICE

CLAIM WAS ISSUED PROPERLY IN THE HIGH COURT, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS SENT TO THE WRONG OFFICE

December 17, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

In Lawrence, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Croydon [2024] EWHC 3061 (Admin) Mr Justice Linden dismissed the defendant’s application to strike out a claim on the basis that it had not been brought in time.  The…

COURT GIVES SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT EMPLOYER IN COVID 19 CASES: SAYING "SOMETHING WILL TURN UP" IS NOT SUFFICIENT

COURT GIVES SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT EMPLOYER IN COVID 19 CASES: SAYING “SOMETHING WILL TURN UP” IS NOT SUFFICIENT

December 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Summary judgment

NB THIS DECISION WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL SEE  Mark Edwards & Ors v 2 Sisters Food Group Limited [2025] EWHC 1312 (KB) AND THE DISCUSSION ON THIS BLOG HERE In  Edwards & Ors v 2 Sisters Food Group Ltd [2024] EWCC 21…

COURT OF APPEAL FIND THAT CLAIMANT'S ACTION AGAINST "WRONG" DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: PERMISSION TO AMEND THE CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN

COURT OF APPEAL FIND THAT CLAIMANT’S ACTION AGAINST “WRONG” DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT: PERMISSION TO AMEND THE CLAIM SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN

December 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Striking out

I am grateful to barrister James Patience for sending me a copy of the Court of Appeal judgment in ELYSA ALTON  and – POWSZECHNY ZAKLAD UBEZPIECZEN [2024] EWCA Civ 1435. The Court of Appeal upheld the decision of a Circuit…

1 2 … 4 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

  • 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
  • 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)
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS SERVED LATE: THE COURT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS - BUT... : BE WARY OF MISSING THINGS WHEN OTHER THINGS ARE GOING ON...
  • 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.