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
THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON

THIS CASE SHOULD BE HEARD IN MANCHESTER: ANOTHER ADMINISTRATIVE COURT CASE TRANSFERRED AWAY FROM LONDON

August 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have looked many times at judgments where the courts have determined that regional centres are the appropriate venue for certain cases. We have another example here.  The claimant wanted the matter heard in London. The court directed it be…

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 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A PRACTICAL AI PRIMER FOR LAWYERS: THE SECOND EDITION OF “ANDREW AND THE MARVELLOUS ANALYTICAL ENGINE”: MAJOR ADDITIONS TO A FAST MOVING AND IMPORTANT AREA
  • ENFORCEMENT BULLETIN 7: SECOND ATTEMPT TO ENFORCE A FOREIGN JUDGMENT WAS (AMONG OTHER THINGS) AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
  • LITIGATOR’S LIFELINES 3: WHAT IF YOU HAVE SERVED A SCHEDULE OF COSTS LATE?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “SKELETON ARGUMENTS – DO THEM PROPERLY OR YOU WON’T GET PAID” (NOVEMBER 2014)
  • COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE

Top Posts

FORM N1 HAS BEEN SLIGHTLY AMENDED: THIS COULD BE A TRAP FOR THE UNWARY: PUTTING THE DEFENDANT'S EMAIL ADDRESS ON THE CLAIM FORM DOES NOT CHANGE THE RULES FOR SERVICE...
YOU CAN'T SIMPLY WITHDRAW AN APPEAL WITHOUT PERMISSION: APPELLANT SEEKS TO WITHDRAW APPEAL & DOESN'T ATTEND - BUT THE APPEAL GOES AHEAD AND THE APPELLANT WINS ...
PROVING THINGS 304 : FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED IN A £7 MILLION CLAIM: "THE WASTE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CAUSED BY THE CLAIMANT'S DISHONESTY IS SCANDALOUS"
COSTS BITES 459: A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEPRIVED OF THEIR COSTS BECAUSE PRECEDENT U WAS SERVED FIVE HOURS LATE
THE POWER TO GRANT AN INJUNCTION NORMALLY REQUIRES A CAUSE OF ACTION: (ONE OF) THE DIFFICULTIES OF AN ANONYMOUS LITIGANT

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.