PROVING THINGS 252: THAT CRUCIAL MISSING WITNESS: “HAMLET WITHOUT THE PRINCE…”: THE DEFENDANT DID NOT CALL A CRUCIAL WITNESS BECAUSE THEY BELIEVED HIS EVIDENCE WOULD BE HARMFUL TO THEM

We are looking again at the judgment of HHJ Berkley in Melia & Anor v Tamlyn And Son ltd [2024] EWHC 3002 (Ch). The defendant did not call the one witness that had first hand knowledge of conversations and other matters that could have contradicted the claimants' account.  The judge found that t...

Enjoying this post?

Become a Civil Litigation Brief member to read full articles and access all premium content.

Become a member

Already a member? Log in below