Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Venue
ISSUING CLAIMS IN THE TCC: LOCAL IS QUICKER (AND PROBABLY MANDATORY IN ANY EVENT)

ISSUING CLAIMS IN THE TCC: LOCAL IS QUICKER (AND PROBABLY MANDATORY IN ANY EVENT)

October 21, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies in Workman Properties Ltd v Adi Building And Refurbishment Ltd [2024] EWHC 2627 (TCC). This time to look at the judge’s concluding observations as to venue. The failure to issue in…

MANCHESTER IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE VENUE FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN NORFOLK: THE CASE GOES SOUTH...

MANCHESTER IS NOT THE APPROPRIATE VENUE FOR SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN NORFOLK: THE CASE GOES SOUTH…

April 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Bartosik, R (On the Application Of) v Office of the Police & Crime Commissioner for Norfolk [2024] EWHC 932 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham held that the Administrative Court in Manchester is not the appropriate venue for a dispute over…

ISSUING HIGH VALUE PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: LOCAL IS USUALLY BEST: HIGH COURT DECISION

ISSUING HIGH VALUE PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIMS: LOCAL IS USUALLY BEST: HIGH COURT DECISION

August 7, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Members Content

I am grateful to all those readers who brought my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in  Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB), in particular to the section on the wisdom of issuing in local…

ANOTHER CASE WHERE JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS WERE ISSUED IN LONDON BUT IT WAS TRANSFERRED TO LEEDS

ANOTHER CASE WHERE JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS WERE ISSUED IN LONDON BUT IT WAS TRANSFERRED TO LEEDS

May 30, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Fajr Ellis, R (On the Application Of) v Student Loans Company [2022] EWHC 1263 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham held that judicial review proceedings, issued in London, should be transferred to the administrative court in Leeds.   “In my judgment…

JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS SENT TO THE NORTH: LOCAL COURTS ARE BEST…

January 27, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content

In  Fortt, R (On the Application Of) v Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd [2022] EWHC 152 (Admin) Mr Justice Fordham ordered that judicial review proceedings be sent to Manchester rather than heard in London.  The judgment emphasises the importance of…

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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.