Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » 2015 » May » 17

THAT "DIFFICULT SECOND STATEMENT": IT IS HARDLY EVER GOING TO BE A HIT

May 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Relief from sanctions

The judgment in Buswell -v- Symes [2015] EWHC 1379 (QB) illustrates the dangers of “supplementary “witness statements. Real problems can occur for the party putting in the new evidence. THE CASE The claimant was seriously injured when his motorcycle was…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2023. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 31,089 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE NEW RULES ON QOCS AND COSTS 1: IMPLEMENTATION
  • RESPONDENT SIX MONTHS LATE IN SERVING WITNESS STATEMENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED
  • FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY FOUND WHEN AN INVOICE WAS DOCTORED: NOT EVERYTHING CAN BE SAID WITH FLOWERS
  • ITS OFFICIAL – THE BEST COSTS ADVICE YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER: READ IT HERE: CONTEST WINNER
  • DELAY BY THE CLAIMANT WAS NOT “WAREHOUSING” AND DID NOT LEAD TO A STRIKE OUT: A PARTY ALLEGING DELAY WAS ABUSE MUST ACT PROMPTLY

Top Posts & Pages

  • THE NEW RULES ON QOCS AND COSTS 1: IMPLEMENTATION
  • "I FIND THAT THE CLAIM WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE CLAIMANT'S LAWYERS ON A PREMISE WHICH WAS IRRELEVANT AND WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CLAIMANT'S EVIDENCE OR THE LAW": WHY MUCH MORE CARE IS NEEDED IN DRAFTING SCHEDULES
  • COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED APPEAL BECAUSE OF PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS: INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD NOT BE SUPPLEMENTED BY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONING: THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE IS FUNDAMENTAL TO A FAIR HEARING
  • RESPONDENT SIX MONTHS LATE IN SERVING WITNESS STATEMENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED
  • ITS OFFICIAL - THE BEST COSTS ADVICE YOU CAN GIVE TO A YOUNG LAWYER: READ IT HERE: CONTEST WINNER

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

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

Copyright © 2023 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin