FIFTH BIRTHDAY REVIEW 7: THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES

I am looking back at the posts that have been part of a series over the past five years. The “Back to Basics” posts are part of  a series that is  very much ongoing. The aim of each post is to deal with one very specific area of practice.  If the issues are too “basic” for some readers I apologise. However the posts are usually written after a case, or personal experience, or sometimes comments on Twitter, reveal a very basic hole in someone’s knowledge. (For instance a recent tweet stated that the trial bundle included all the without prejudice correspondence, including letters from each side agreeing that without prejudice correspondence should not be placed in the bundle – that issue will be addressed in a future post).

THE POSTS

• 1: The humble application: wording and timing.
• 2: “Evidence in support” of an application.
• 3: The statement of truth
• 4: What not to put in a witness statement “inadmissible and irrelevant opinion, submission, speculation and innuendo.”
• 5: Schedules and counter-schedules: Not a number-crunching exercise.
• 6: Non-disclosure of a Part 36 offer
• 7. Bundles: A chance to revisit “Sedley’s Laws”