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.
Browse: Home » 2019 » October » 12
COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT'S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE  OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT’S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

October 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Witness statements

In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) Master Davison allowed the claimant to produce as evidence the tapes they had recorded of their consultations with the defendant’s medical experts.   This decision raises some interesting issues. (The case…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2021. 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 23,033 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6th APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE SOLICITOR HAS TO SIGN
  • AVOIDING PROBLEMS: TWELVE THINGS FOR LITIGATORS TO THINK ABOUT IN MARCH
  • GOING BANKRUPT DID NOT RELEASE BANKRUPT FROM A JUDGMENT DEBT: JUDGE GIVES PERMISSION FOR ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS TO CONTINUE DESPITE A SUBSTANTIAL DELAY
  • PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES

Top Posts & Pages

  • AVOIDING PROBLEMS: TWELVE THINGS FOR LITIGATORS TO THINK ABOUT IN MARCH
  • CLEAR FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NO SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE IN APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE: CLAIMANT IN AT THE DEEP END
  • PROVING THINGS 205: COUNSEL NOT ENTITLED TO £6,922,532 IN FEES BUT WERE ENTITLED TO EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
  • WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 6th APRIL 2021: THE DECLARATION THAT THE SOLICITOR HAS TO SIGN
  • GOING BANKRUPT DID NOT RELEASE BANKRUPT FROM A JUDGMENT DEBT: JUDGE GIVES PERMISSION FOR ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS TO CONTINUE DESPITE A SUBSTANTIAL DELAY

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

  • Hardwicke
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • 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 © 2021 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin