EXPERT WATCH 18: CLAIMANT NOT ENTITLED TO SIGHT OF DEFENDANT’S DRAFT REPORT – REFERRED TO IN DEFENCE AND THE REPORT OF ANOTHER EXPERT
Here we look at a claimant’s applications under CPR 31.14(1) and 35.10 to have sight of a draft expert report that the defendant had referred to in a defence and in the report of another expert. The judgment contains a…
SOME MORE ABOUT SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE: THOSE CARRYING OUT THE FILMING MUST NOT ATTEMPT TO USURP THE ROLE OF THE TRIAL JUDGE
We are looking again at the decision yesterday in relation to the conduct of surveillance evidence. Just to highlight two issues: (1) a camera operator should not try to usurp the functions of the judge. The practice of providing a…
MAZUR MATTERS 13: WHAT IS MEAN BY “THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION” 4: THE COURT SHOULD LOOK AT THE ENTIRETY OF ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN “IN THE ROUND”
The decision Mazur continues to attract considerable comment, for good reason. Here we consider the question of how the courts approach the issue. (13 may be lucky for some. Just remember the court considers the position “in the round”). …
You must be logged in to post a comment.