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 » Page 3
FATAL ACCIDENT ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT: CAUTION NEEDED WHEN DEALING WITH A DEVELOPING AREA OF LAW

FATAL ACCIDENT ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT: CAUTION NEEDED WHEN DEALING WITH A DEVELOPING AREA OF LAW

July 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

In the judgment this morning in Begum v Maran (UK) Ltd [2020] EWHC 1846 (QB) Mr Justice Jay refused a defendant’s application to strike out a claim and/for summary damages in for fatal accident damages.  It highlights the point that…

CLAIM STRUCK OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED, COUNTERCLAIM CONTINUES: CLAIMANT HITS A BRICK WALL

CLAIM STRUCK OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED, COUNTERCLAIM CONTINUES: CLAIMANT HITS A BRICK WALL

July 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Case Management, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

In Edmunds v Newell & Anor [2020] EW Misc 7 (CC) HHJ Jarman QC refused a claimant’s application for relief from sanctions. The claim was struck out but the counterclaim continued.   THE CASE The claimant claimed £110,599.99 plus interest…

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…

DEFENCE STRUCK OUT FOLLOWING FAILURE TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE: SEVERE SANCTION WAS NOT DISPROPORTIONATE

DEFENCE STRUCK OUT FOLLOWING FAILURE TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE: SEVERE SANCTION WAS NOT DISPROPORTIONATE

March 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

In MKG Convenience Ltd, Re [2020] EWHC 547 (Ch) HHJ David Cooke refused the defendants’ application for relief from sanctions following a failure to comply with a peremptory order in relation to disclosure.   The sanction was severe, however the circumstances…

DEFENDANT'S PART 20 CLAIM AGAINST CLAIMANT'S WITNESSES STRUCK OUT: WITNESSES HAVE IMMUNITY (AND THIS HAS CONSEQUENCES...)

DEFENDANT’S PART 20 CLAIM AGAINST CLAIMANT’S WITNESSES STRUCK OUT: WITNESSES HAVE IMMUNITY (AND THIS HAS CONSEQUENCES…)

March 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister David Green for supplying me with a note* of the judgment of HHJ Saggerson in Holley -v- Woodburn.  HHJ Saggerson, Central London County Court). A copy of the judgment is available  here C65YX969 Holley v…

CLAIMANT'S HUMAN RIGHTS CLAIM FOR LOSS OF CHERISHED NUMBER PLATES NOT STRUCK OUT:

CLAIMANT’S HUMAN RIGHTS CLAIM FOR LOSS OF CHERISHED NUMBER PLATES NOT STRUCK OUT:

March 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

I am grateful to solicitor Ian Bailey from PGB Gitlin Baker for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Roberts in Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Transport.  (County Court at Central London 24/02/2020 – a copy of…

JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO STRIKE OUT ACTION AGAINST NON-EXISTENT COMPANY: ALSO GUIDANCE FOR INSURERS ON MOST PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION

JUDGE WAS CORRECT TO STRIKE OUT ACTION AGAINST NON-EXISTENT COMPANY: ALSO GUIDANCE FOR INSURERS ON MOST PRUDENT COURSE OF ACTION

February 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Striking out

In the judgment in Cowley v LW Carlisle & Company Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 227 today the Court of Appeal dismissed the claimant’s appeal against an order striking out his claim against one defendant.  At the time the striking out…

BILL OF COSTS STRUCK OUT IN FIXED COSTS CASE: CPR 36.20(11) GIVES RISE TO A "DIFFERENT, SELF-CONTAINED PROCEDURE" FOR DISPUTES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS

BILL OF COSTS STRUCK OUT IN FIXED COSTS CASE: CPR 36.20(11) GIVES RISE TO A “DIFFERENT, SELF-CONTAINED PROCEDURE” FOR DISPUTES AS TO DISBURSEMENTS

February 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Fixed Costs, Members Content, Striking out

In Nema v Kirkland [2019] EWHC B15 (Costs) Master Leonard struck out a claimant’s bill of costs on the grounds that the action was subject to the fixed costs regime and an assessment should never have been sought. The rules…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: "WAREHOUSING" A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY: “WAREHOUSING” A CLAIM IS NOT AN ALWAYS ABUSE OF PROCESS (AND SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN STRUCK OUT IN ANY EVENT)

January 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In the judgment today in Alibrahim v Asturion Fondation [2020] EWCA Civ 32 the Court of Appeal confirmed that the court should not have struck out a claim that had been left dormant for a period. “Striking out was a…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN DEFENDANT FILES AN INADEQUATE PLEADING

December 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case, Striking out

The Denton principles were considered in an unusual context by Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Oliver v Shaikh [2019] EWHC 3389 (QB).   THE CASE The claimant is a Circuit Judge. He brought an action for harassment against the defendant….

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR PARTIES TO ARRIVE AT COURT: APPEAL AGAINST ORDER UNDER CPR 39.3 ALLOWED

TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE WAITED FOR PARTIES TO ARRIVE AT COURT: APPEAL AGAINST ORDER UNDER CPR 39.3 ALLOWED

September 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Adjournments, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Akita & Anor v Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland [2019] EWHC 1712 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer held that a trial judge, knowing that parties were on the way to court, should have waited longer before…

ROBUST DECISION TO STRIKE OUT PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH RULES IS UPHELD ON APPEAL: BANDWAGONS & CRASH HELMETS IN BRADFORD COUNTY COURT

ROBUST DECISION TO STRIKE OUT PERSONAL INJURY CLAIM FOR NON-COMPLIANCE WITH RULES IS UPHELD ON APPEAL: BANDWAGONS & CRASH HELMETS IN BRADFORD COUNTY COURT

July 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

I am grateful to barrister Toby Coupe for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Gosnell in Aslam -v- The Secretary of State for Justice (17/05/2019), a copy of which is available here.    Aslam v Secretary of…

CASE NOT STRUCK OUT AFTER  A FOUR YEAR DELAY: ALTERNATIVE "SANCTION" ORDERED INSTEAD

CASE NOT STRUCK OUT AFTER A FOUR YEAR DELAY: ALTERNATIVE “SANCTION” ORDERED INSTEAD

July 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

In  Alba Exotic Fruit SH PK v MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A. [2019] EWHC 1779 (Comm) HHJ Rawlings considered the appropriate sanction where there had been a four year delay by the claimant in pursuing an action. This case is…

MASTER ENTITLED TO STRIKE OUT UNPARTICULARISED GROUNDS OF DISPUTE  IN SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: BE PARTICULAR OR ELSE...

MASTER ENTITLED TO STRIKE OUT UNPARTICULARISED GROUNDS OF DISPUTE IN SOLICITOR AND OWN CLIENT ASSESSMENT: BE PARTICULAR OR ELSE…

June 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Members Content, Striking out

In Ainsworth -v- Stewarts Law LLP [2019] EWCA Civ 897 HHJ Klein (sitting as a High Court judge) dismissed an appeal against an order dismissing a former client’s challenge to work done on documents. The Master held that the claimant’s…

LIMITS ON THE DUTY OF COUNSEL TO ADVISE ON COSTS AND FUNDING: ALSO PARTICULARS OF CLAIM - IF YOU CAN'T PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY ITS PROBABLY INDICATIVE OF A POOR CASE

LIMITS ON THE DUTY OF COUNSEL TO ADVISE ON COSTS AND FUNDING: ALSO PARTICULARS OF CLAIM – IF YOU CAN’T PLEAD A CASE PROPERLY ITS PROBABLY INDICATIVE OF A POOR CASE

April 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Striking out

The judgment in Andrews & Ors v Messer Beg Ltd [2019] EWHC 911 (Ch) contains an interesting discussion on a barrister’s duty to advise on the funding of litigation.  The Part 20 claimant, having had the particulars of claim struck out, …

STRIKING OUT AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT: ANOTHER  CASE TO "CUT OUT AND KEEP": ALS0 - THE EVIDENCE STOPS ONCE THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN HEARD

STRIKING OUT AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT: ANOTHER CASE TO “CUT OUT AND KEEP”: ALS0 – THE EVIDENCE STOPS ONCE THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN HEARD

February 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

Some judgments extrapolate and summarise legal principles so succinctly that they can be regarded as “cut out and keep” guides to an area of law or practice.   The judgment of Master Shuman in  Capita Pension Trustees Ltd & Anor v Sedgwick…

STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN'T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT'S CASE STRUCK OUT

STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN’T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT’S CASE STRUCK OUT

February 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

I am grateful to barrister Toby Bishop   for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Marsh in Bhusate -v- Patel [2018] EWHC 2362 (Ch). Re Bhusate JUDGMENT copy  Toby’s discussion of the substantive issues that arose in the claim can…

LITIGATORS KEEP A CAREFUL LOOK OUT: ITS YOUR DUTY TO MONITOR YOUR EXPERT'S CONDUCT (OTHERWISE ITS YOUR CLIENT THAT SUFFERS)

LITIGATORS KEEP A CAREFUL LOOK OUT: ITS YOUR DUTY TO MONITOR YOUR EXPERT’S CONDUCT (OTHERWISE ITS YOUR CLIENT THAT SUFFERS)

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One specific aspect of the judgment in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) that needs emphasising is the duty the case places on a litigant’s lawyers to monitor the conduct of an expert and…

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT'S APPROACH LEADS TO "SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT'S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT": A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ - NOW

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT’S APPROACH LEADS TO “SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT’S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT”: A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ – NOW

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

The judgment of Mr Justice Males in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) is one of the most robust I have seen in relation to expert evidence. An expert’s failure to properly engage…

THE SPI NORTH (NON-ADMISSION IN PLEADING CASE) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE SECOND POINT: COMPELLING EVIDENCE NEEDED AND NO SATELLITE LITIGATION PLEASE

THE SPI NORTH (NON-ADMISSION IN PLEADING CASE) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE SECOND POINT: COMPELLING EVIDENCE NEEDED AND NO SATELLITE LITIGATION PLEASE

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

Yesterday’s post on SPI North Ltd v Swiss Post International (UK) Ltd & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 7  concentrated upon the Court of Appeal guidance in relation to the drafting of a pleading.  However the second point on which the claimant’s appeal …

STRIKING OUT A SECOND ACTION: DIFFERENT CLAIMANT BUT ESSENTIALLY THE SAME ACTION: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

STRIKING OUT A SECOND ACTION: DIFFERENT CLAIMANT BUT ESSENTIALLY THE SAME ACTION: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

December 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Second set of proceedings

In  the judgment today Samuel v Samuel & Ors [2018] EWHC 3513 (Ch) Master Teverson struck out an action as an abuse of process.  There had been earlier proceedings of a similar nature that had been compromised.   Although there was…

THE DANGERS OF PLEADING DISHONESTY: PART OF REPLY TO DEFENCE STRUCK OUT

THE DANGERS OF PLEADING DISHONESTY: PART OF REPLY TO DEFENCE STRUCK OUT

November 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Canary Riverside Estate Management Ltd v Circus Apartments Ltd [2018] EWHC 1376 (Ch) Master Shuman provides an succinct summary of the principles relating to pleading dishonesty.  Part of a Reply that alleged dishonesty was struck out. THE CASE The claimant…

SIX YEARS ON: YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CASE YOU WANT TO PLEAD: CLAIMANT'S ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO PARTICULARISE CASE

SIX YEARS ON: YOU SHOULD KNOW THE CASE YOU WANT TO PLEAD: CLAIMANT’S ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF INABILITY TO PARTICULARISE CASE

November 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

The judgment of HHJ Platts in Wrightson -v- Flor Projects Limited [2018] EWHC 3036 (QB) provides, amongst other things, an important warning on the need to plead and particularise a case properly.  The case shows that when a claimant has…

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

AGGRESSIVE LITIGATION IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE: JUDGE REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH A COMMENT, OR TWO, AMONG THE WAY)

October 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Adam Heppinstall for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser today in Bates -v- The Post Office [2018] EWHC 2968 (QB). This is a forceful judgment and what the judge had…

STATEMENTS OF CASE: KEEP THEM SIMPLE: NO NEED TO PLEAD A REFERENCE TO SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN IN A CASE ALLEGING BREACH OF CONTRACT

STATEMENTS OF CASE: KEEP THEM SIMPLE: NO NEED TO PLEAD A REFERENCE TO SIR CHRISTOPHER WREN IN A CASE ALLEGING BREACH OF CONTRACT

September 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Portland Stone Firms Ltd & Ors v Barclays Bank Plc & Ors [2018] EWHC 2341 (QB) Mr Justice Stuart-Smith had some telling observations about the way in which statements of case should be drafted. “The applications before the Court have…

SECOND ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIM IN DECEIT CAN CONTINUE AFTER CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE FAILED: THE CLAIMANT NEED NOT HAVE GAMBLED ON FRAUD CLAIM FIRST TIME AROUND

SECOND ACTION NOT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: CLAIM IN DECEIT CAN CONTINUE AFTER CLAIM IN NEGLIGENCE FAILED: THE CLAIMANT NEED NOT HAVE GAMBLED ON FRAUD CLAIM FIRST TIME AROUND

September 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Second set of proceedings

In Playboy Club London Ltd v Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro Spa [2018] EWCA Civ 2025 the Court of Appeal overturned a ruling that an action in deceit was an abuse of process. The claimant’s action in negligence failed because there was…

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THEY ARE ISSUED AND SERVED BY AN UNAUTHORISED ENTITY? TWO CASES THAT AID THE CLAIMANT

SHOULD PROCEEDINGS BE STRUCK OUT WHEN THEY ARE ISSUED AND SERVED BY AN UNAUTHORISED ENTITY? TWO CASES THAT AID THE CLAIMANT

August 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Striking out

The judgment of HHJ Worster  In Kassam -v- Gill (13th August 2018, County Court at Birmingham) is available on Lawtel. There are several procedural aspects of that case that are of general interest and which I will look at over…

DEBARRED PARTY CANNOT CROSS-EXAMINE AT TRIAL:  WHAT ROLE CAN A DEBARRED PARTY PLAY AT TRIAL?

DEBARRED PARTY CANNOT CROSS-EXAMINE AT TRIAL: WHAT ROLE CAN A DEBARRED PARTY PLAY AT TRIAL?

August 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Peremptory orders, Striking out

In Kliers v Schmerler & Anor [2018] EWHC 1350 (Ch) Mr M H Rosen QC (sitting as a  Deputy High Court Judge) refused the defendant’s application that it be allowed to cross-examine the claimant even after it had been debarred from…

UNDERPAYMENT OF COURT FEES IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: HOWEVER DESPITE THIS AN ACTION WAS ISSUED WITHIN TIME & WOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT

UNDERPAYMENT OF COURT FEES IS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: HOWEVER DESPITE THIS AN ACTION WAS ISSUED WITHIN TIME & WOULD NOT BE STRUCK OUT

July 9, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Limitation, Members Content, Sanctions

In the judgment today in  Atha & Co Solicitors v Liddle [2018] EWHC 1751 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the issue of whether a failure to pay the correct fee on the issue of proceedings meant that a claim was…

THE LIMITS OF DECLARATORY RELIEF: THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR IT: CLAIMANT'S ARGUMENTS (AND PLEADINGS) FAIL TO RAISE THE ROOF

THE LIMITS OF DECLARATORY RELIEF: THE DANGERS OF APPLYING FOR IT: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENTS (AND PLEADINGS) FAIL TO RAISE THE ROOF

June 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

I am grateful to my colleague John de Waal QC at Hardwicke for  bringing my attention to the judgment of Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Office Depot International (UK) Ltd v UBS Asset Management (UK) Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 1494 (TCC).  It…

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL: PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED

May 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Court fees, Members Content, Striking out

In January this year  I reported the judgment in Cross-v- Black Bull (Doncaster) Limited* (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2017) 072 – Cross v Black Bull – Judgment.Where HH Judge Robinson allowed an appeal where the District Judge had struck out a case…

STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE? WELL YOU MAY NOT BE: COURT ORDERS THAT MAY NOT COMPLY WITH COURT RULES

STRUCK OUT FOR FAILURE TO PAY THE TRIAL FEE? WELL YOU MAY NOT BE: COURT ORDERS THAT MAY NOT COMPLY WITH COURT RULES

May 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

When the rules committee re-introduced the concept of “automatic striking out” into the rules it was always going to cause problems. A case can be automatically struck out for failure to pay the trial fee in time.  However some Court…

WHEN THE LIMITATION ACT IS NOT YOUR BEST FRIEND: "SHEER  INCOMPETENCE" DOES NOT PERSUADE A COURT TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION

WHEN THE LIMITATION ACT IS NOT YOUR BEST FRIEND: “SHEER INCOMPETENCE” DOES NOT PERSUADE A COURT TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION

April 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Limitation, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Striking out

CPR 17.(4) is always one of the most “challenging” sections of the Limitation Act in practice. Amending the name of a party after the expiry of the limitation period is not always easy.  The judgment in Best Friends Group & Anor…

SPEAKING TO YOUR WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF THEIR EVIDENCE: STRIKE OUT DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

SPEAKING TO YOUR WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF THEIR EVIDENCE: STRIKE OUT DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

April 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

An earlier post reported on the decision of the Employment Tribunal in Chidzoy -v- BBC (available here). It illustrates the dangers of a witness talking to anyone in the course of their evidence.  This case emphasises the importance of witnesses not…

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

APPEAL ALLOWED BECAUSE OF A SERIOUS PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY: IF YOU WANT SUMMARY JUDGMENT THEN MAKE SURE YOU HAVE APPLIED FOR IT

March 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

On the 18th April 2018 I am,  with a number of my colleagues from Hardwicke, giving a talk on “Applications for Defendants”*.  The judgment this week in St Clair v King & Anor [2018] EWHC 682 (Ch) may well feature.   It…

STRIKING OUT A DEFENCE: FONT SIZE, LINE SPACING AND A MAXIMUM PAGE LENGTH ORDERED: PLEADINGS THAT "TEND TO OBFUSCATE RATHER THAN CLARIFY THE ISSUES"

STRIKING OUT A DEFENCE: FONT SIZE, LINE SPACING AND A MAXIMUM PAGE LENGTH ORDERED: PLEADINGS THAT “TEND TO OBFUSCATE RATHER THAN CLARIFY THE ISSUES”

March 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Brown & Anor (t/a Maple Hayes Hall School) v AB [2018] EWHC 623 (QB) Mr Edward Pepperall QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) struck out a defence that was . In giving the defendant another chance he made…

THE PROBLEM IN OBTAINING AN ORDER YOU HAVEN'T ASKED FOR:AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 3.4 WILL NOT BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION UNDER PART 24

THE PROBLEM IN OBTAINING AN ORDER YOU HAVEN’T ASKED FOR:AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 3.4 WILL NOT BE TREATED AS AN APPLICATION UNDER PART 24

January 11, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

The judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Saeed & Anor v Ibrahim & Ors [2018] EWHC 3 (Ch) contains several important observations in relation to making applications.  The Master refused to treat an application, ostensibly made under CPR 3.4, as an…

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT ALLOWED: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL - THE FULL JUDGMENT

COURT FEES AND STRIKING OUT: APPEAL AGAINST STRIKING OUT ALLOWED: CROSS -v- BLACK BULL – THE FULL JUDGMENT

January 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Court fees, Members Content

I reported the judgment in Cross-v- Black Bull (Doncaster) Limited* (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2017) at the end of last year.  The full judgment is now available and is attached here 072 – Cross v Black Bull – Judgment A SUMMARY The…

STRIKING OUT THE CLAIM FOR NON-PAYMENT OF TRIAL FEE: THIS IS ALWAYS A POINT TO WATCH

STRIKING OUT THE CLAIM FOR NON-PAYMENT OF TRIAL FEE: THIS IS ALWAYS A POINT TO WATCH

October 13, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Rule Changes, Sanctions, Striking out

In April this year the rules were amended to introduce a concept of “automatic striking out”.  Put simply if a claimant does not pay the court fee by the relevant date. I have seen occasions where this has had effect….

UNDOUBTED FLAWS IN THE WAY WITNESS STATEMENTS WERE DRAFTED: LEADS TO A WASTE OF TIME AND COSTS

UNDOUBTED FLAWS IN THE WAY WITNESS STATEMENTS WERE DRAFTED: LEADS TO A WASTE OF TIME AND COSTS

July 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

There are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Lady Justice Thirwall in Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice [2017] EWHC 1040 (QB,  Here I want to concentrate upon the witness statements, in particular the defendant’s witness statements. It is another…

WISEMAN -V- MARSTON: COURT FEES CASE: TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

WISEMAN -V- MARSTON: COURT FEES CASE: TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE

June 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Court fees, Members Content, Striking out

The transcript of the judgment in the Wiseman -v- Marston case is now available. I have included it as an attachment to the previous posts on the case. The links are also available here. THE JUDGMENT AND COURT OF APPEAL…

WISEMAN -V- MARSTON: THE UNDERPAYMENT OF COURT FEES:  DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED

WISEMAN -V- MARSTON: THE UNDERPAYMENT OF COURT FEES: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR PERMISSION TO APPEAL REFUSED

May 31, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Court fees, Members Content, Striking out

In December last year I reported on the decision in Wiseman -v- Marston’s PLC (Sheffield County Court 21st December 2016). His Honour Judge Robinson allowed the claimant’s appeal in a case relating to payment of court fees. The defendant applied for…

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM MUST BE IN A FORM THAT THE DEFENDANT CAN RESPOND TO: PLEADINGS STRUCK OUT ALTHOUGH THE CLAIM WAS NOT

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM MUST BE IN A FORM THAT THE DEFENDANT CAN RESPOND TO: PLEADINGS STRUCK OUT ALTHOUGH THE CLAIM WAS NOT

May 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In Kaplan -v- Super PCS LLP [2017] EWHC 1165 (Ch) Mrs Justice Rose struck out the particulars of claim because it was impossible for the defendants to respond to it. It is an object lesson that, even in a complex…

WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES WHEN ITS DEFENCE IS STRUCK OUT? NOTHING

WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES WHEN ITS DEFENCE IS STRUCK OUT? NOTHING

May 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content, Striking out

What is the position of a defendant whose action has been struck out?  This was the question considered by Mr Justice Soole in Michael -v- Phillips [2017] EWHC 1984 (QB). The short answer is the defendant cannot dispute any aspect…

ISSUING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION ARE TAKEN OUT: A FATAL ERROR FROM THE OUTSET

ISSUING PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION ARE TAKEN OUT: A FATAL ERROR FROM THE OUTSET

April 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Striking out

In Qunintana -v- Surrey and Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust 28/03/2017 Master Cook upheld the established principle that an action cannot be brought by administrators of an estate before the letters of administration are taken out.  Proceedings cannot later be amended…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A "SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS" PUT RIGHT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A “SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS” PUT RIGHT

April 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There may well be a term for the process by which a number of decisions, which appeared sensible at the time they were made, lead to a ridiculous result. This principle may well apply to what happened in Falmouth House…

A WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IS IN PURDAH: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER

A WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IS IN PURDAH: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

The Employment Tribunal decision in Chidzoy -v- BBC (available here) contains an important lesson to lawyers and litigants alike.  A witness in the course of giving evidence is in “purdah” – in that they should not discuss the case with…

HIGH COURT WRITES AN OPEN LETTER TO LITIGANTS IN PERSON: STRIKING OUT CAN BE A BENEFIT NOT A BURDEN

HIGH COURT WRITES AN OPEN LETTER TO LITIGANTS IN PERSON: STRIKING OUT CAN BE A BENEFIT NOT A BURDEN

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out

There are aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Walker in Chambers -v- Rooney [2017] EWHC 285 (QB) that amount to an open letter from the High Court to litigants in person. Some of the observations are aimed at everyone…

RASTIN RESURRECTED: DO THE NEW RULES RE-INTRODUCE AUTOMATIC STRIKING OUT?

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Court fees, Members Content, Striking out

There have been comments on Twitter, and now in the Gazette, that “automatic striking out” is being introduced by the rules coming into force on the 6th April 2017.  This is true, however it is important that the rules are…

ADVERSE DECISION IN ARBITRATION PROCEEDINGS DID NOT RENDER AN ACTION AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: COURT OF APPEAL REVERSED STRIKING OUT DECISION

January 14, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Striking out

 In Michael Wilson & Partners -v- Sinclair [2017] EWCA Civ 3 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision to strike out the claimant’s case.  The fact that there had been earlier arbitration proceedings did not, in this case,  render a second…

← Previous 1 2 3 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

  • 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…)
  • 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…
  • 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

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
  • 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"
  • 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

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.