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 » 2016 » February » 08

PROVING THINGS 3: THE COMPLETE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE MEANS THE COURT WILL NOT SPECULATE

February 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Uncategorized, Witness statements

Another example of a failure to prove damages can be found in the decision of His Honour Judge Stephen Davies (sitting as a High Court judge) in Fairhurst Developments Limited -v- Collins [2016] EWHC 199 (TCC). KEY POINTS This is…

PROVING THINGS 2: EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES MUST BE PITCH PERFECT

February 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Uncategorized, Written advocacy

Another example of the need to prove damages can be seen in the Court of Appeal decision in Gartell & Son (a firm) -v- Yeovil Town Football & Athletic Club Limited [2016] EWCA Civ 62.  It is another case that…

PROVING THINGS 1: CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT NOTICES WILL NOT CUT IT

February 8, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The really surprising thing about going to court (for some people) is that, you have to prove things.  Judges work on the basis of evidence.  On the whole judges prefer live evidence from witnesses who are cross-examined. I The case…

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 31,345 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
  • PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE
  • PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE
  • COSTS BITES 73: IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION THE APPLICANTS FAILED TO GET PAST THE FIRST STAGE
  • COST BITES 72 : COSTS BETWEEN CREDITOR AND SUPPLIER UNDER THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT: CREDITOR’S ARGUMENT HITS A (BLACKPOOL) ROCK

Top Posts & Pages

  • THE ABSENCE OF A REPLY TO A DEFENCE DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT COULD BE ASSUMED THAT THE ACCOUNT IN THE DEFENCE WAS ACCEPTED
  • PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE
  • PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE
  • COSTS BITES 73: IN A WASTED COSTS APPLICATION THE APPLICANTS FAILED TO GET PAST THE FIRST STAGE
  • COST BITES 72 : COSTS BETWEEN CREDITOR AND SUPPLIER UNDER THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT: CREDITOR'S ARGUMENT HITS A (BLACKPOOL) ROCK

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