Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Trial Bundle

THE FIRST BUNDLE CASE FOR 2017: A BUNDLE THAT WAS NEVER DISCLOSED AND HAS GONE MISSING

January 25, 2017 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content

At some time during the year there is bound to be a judgment about bundles. However the judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Iqbal -v-Iqbal [2017]  EWCA Civ 19 contains a great surprise. Amongst other problems with the…

STRIKING OUT AT TRIAL BECAUSE THE CASE WAS A MESS: A WARNING FOR THOSE WHO WANT LIFE WITHOUT LAWYERS

October 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Striking out, Uncategorized

On a day when the Lord Chief Justice has stated that the legal system must adapt to life without lawyers. It is interesting to read this report of the problems caused by litigants in person. It has kindly been provided…

MUDSLINGING IN WITNESS STATEMENTS CAN BACKFIRE: BUNDLES OF IRRELEVANT DOCUMENTS COUPLED WITH IRRELEVANT AND INADMISSIBLE WITNESS STATEMENTS: A FAMILIAR TALE?

October 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The case of Mohidin -v- The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2015] EWHC 2740 (QB) will, no doubt, be looked at in detail for its implications for claims against the police.  The case also contains interesting observations about similar…

YET MORE ON BUNDLES : BREACH OF ORDER MADE ON "MITCHELL" GROUNDS UPHELD ON "DENTON" GROUNDS

May 1, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Bundles, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The case of Patel -v- Mussa [2015] EWCA Civ 434 is, in essence, another sorry story about bundles.  It is also an example of the Court of Appeal upholding a case management decision made by a judge who applied “Mitchell”…

A 20 DAY TRIAL WHEN THE CASE WAS ALL ABOUT ONE WITNESS: WOULD THIS CASE BE ANY DIFFERENT TODAY?

August 14, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Expert evidence, Mediation & ADR, Members Content, Witness statements

Back in 2003 Chris Evans, the radio presenter, was involved in a lengthy contractual dispute with a number of defendants.  There were 9 parties to the action and the trial went on for twenty days. The judge’s observations at the…

TRIAL BUNDLES: TIMING, CONTENTS AND PRESENTATION : AND DO YOU KNOW SEDLEY’S LAWS?

December 16, 2013 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links, Witness statements

Amidst the Mitchell Mayhem and the high glamour and glitz of Civil Litigation at the moment I am writing a post on the mundane subject of trial bundles.  Mundane but important. The significance of bundles was highlighted in the recent…

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

  • MAZUR MATTERS 64: THE COURT REJECTS WOULD BE APPELLANT’S ARGUMENT THAT A CLAIMANT’S REPRESENTATIVE HAD NO RIGHT OF AUDIENCE
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 86: DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND DEFENCE ON THE MORNING OF TRIAL
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DEFENDANT IS NOT THE CLAIMANT’S KEEPER: ANOTHER CASE WHERE (MIS) SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM LED TO GRIEF
  • CALCULATORS FOR LAWYERS: A CALCULATOR “SUITE” BUILT BY A WORKING BARRISTER: 14 DAYS FREE TRIAL
  • COST BITES 411: NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST CLAIMANT’S DIRECTOR : HE WHO EXPECTS TO BENEFIT RUNS A RISK OF PAYING THE COSTS…

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

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