One Response
Comments are closed.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 12.4K other subscribers
Recent Posts
- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS’S OWN WORDS?
- FILING A NOTICE OF APPEAL OUT OF TIME: A TALE OF THREE CITIES: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN THE APPEAL WAS LATE BUT THE SOLICITORS “DID NOTHING WRONG AT ALL”
- THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE “INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED”
- COST BITES 381: DOES THE COURT HAVE POWER TO ORDER SECURITY FOR COSTS IN RELATION TO AN ASSESSMENT? SOME INTERESTING COMMENTS ABOUT THE COSTS OF ASSESSMENT ALONG THE WAY…
- SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)
Top Posts
- SERVICE POINTS 38: THE CLAIMANT SERVES AT THE WRONG ADDRESS BUT THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO APPLY IN TIME (A CLASSIC STORY)
- COST BITES 380: "ALWAYS CHOOSE A COSTS LAWYER FOR EXPERT LEGAL COSTS ADVICE": GUIDANCE FROM THE SRA
- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS'S OWN WORDS?
- EXPERT WATCH 45: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WHO HAD KNOWLEDGE AND "GENUINE EXPERIENCE IN THE SUBJECT AREA"
- THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 68: COURT OF APPEAL HOLDS THAT THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED AMENDMENTS: THE PLEADINGS WERE "INCOHERENT, SELF-CONTRADICTORY AND INSUFFICIENTLY PARTICULARISED"
Archives
Blogroll
Books
Useful Links
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
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
Must have been forty years ago when I made my first appearance in court as an expert witness. It was a winter`s day with the first snows of winter on the ground in Scotland. With my client`s we were shown into a high ceilinged large room resembling a library to wait for our legal team. It was rather chilly in the room. I then saw a diminutive figure, dressed in some strange garb enter the room from a door from the far end, heading for another door in the opposite corner. I hailed to him and he stopped and came over. I told him we were cold and would he mind to turn the heat up a touch please. He said he would see to it and went on his way.
Subsequently we were called in to court and stood when the judge walked in. When I saw who it was, I was horror stricken, it was that diminutive man who I thought was the janitor. The trial started and I was called into the witness box. When I was introduced the judge raised his eyes from behind his pince nez specs and said, yes we have met, I trust it is now warm enough for him here, if not I am sure we can turn the heat up for him “.
No amount of heat would have been sufficient for those chilling few words.