EXPERT WATCH 16: IS PART 35 PERMISSION NEEDED WHEN A DOCTOR GIVES OPINION EVIDENCE AS TO A PARTY'S ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN LITIGATION?

EXPERT WATCH 16: IS PART 35 PERMISSION NEEDED WHEN A DOCTOR GIVES OPINION EVIDENCE AS TO A PARTY’S ABILITY TO PARTICIPATE IN LITIGATION?

October 1, 2025 · by · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Here we look at a case where a party was seeking a stay of litigation on medical grounds.  Medical evidence was provided which supported the litigant’s stance.  The claimant took objection to the report as it contained “opinion” and the…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW NUMEROUS SMALL REPETITIONS, AND UNEVIDENCED CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES UNDERMINE THE CREDIBILITY OF THE CASE

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW NUMEROUS SMALL REPETITIONS, AND UNEVIDENCED CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES UNDERMINE THE CREDIBILITY OF THE CASE

October 1, 2025 · by · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we are looking at a judgment in a group litigation claim where the judge had to assess the evidence of numerous witnesses. The feature I want to look at is the way in which claims for damages were put…

MAZUR MATTERS 3: CILEX MEMBERS - THE REAL VICTIMS OF ALL THIS: WHAT CILEX MEMBERS CAN DO ABOUT THIS

MAZUR MATTERS 3: CILEX MEMBERS – THE REAL VICTIMS OF ALL THIS: WHAT CILEX MEMBERS CAN DO ABOUT THIS

October 1, 2025 · by · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

If any members of the profession are entitled to be disgruntled (to put it mildly) about the decision in Mazur it is CILEX members who conduct litigation. They have hard earned qualifications and extensive experience. However, unless they come within…