AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2026

We have seen a lot of issues over the years in relation to the drafting of witness statements and presentation of witness evidence.  There are many cases that illustrate the problems that arise. This webinar aims to head off those problems.  I have added to it by looking at recent developments and comments on the use of AI and the drafting of witness statements. Booking details are available here.

“Too often (indeed far too often) witnesses who have had statements prepared for them by solicitors tell the Judge that matters in the statement are not correct; they say (all too believably) that they simply signed what the solicitor had drafted for them without reading it through carefully and critically. This reflects badly not only on the witness, but on the whole case presented by the party calling the witness.” 
Handbook for Litigants in Person – written by five judges).

WHAT THE WEBINAR COVERS

This webinar aims to help litigators avoid the main problems in relation to witness evidence and witness statements.

• The mandatory requirements for witness statements and the consequences of non-compliance
• Protecting the witness from the lawyer
• Protecting the lawyer from the witness
• Witness statements and proportionality
• Where lawyers go badly wrong with witness evidence
• Explaining the significance of the statement of truth
• AI and the drafting of witness statements.
• A checklist for taking a statement

THIS IS NOT A NEW ISSUE

THE WHITE BOOK

“Unfortunately, rules, practice directions and guidance as to the content of witness statements appear to be habitually ignored by practitioners. Periodically, the Court of Appeal and individual trial judges have criticised lawyers for overloading witness statements with material that should not be included.”

THE POSITION IN 1918

“It is true that the affidavits contain many other statements which are not evidence and are not trustworthy. They revel in rumours, they abound in hearsay, they contain many exaggerations and some extravagancies, and after all they are affidavits.” (The Proton [2918] A.C. 578 at 583 (per Lord Sumner).

GOING BACK TO 1737

“Vying and Revying in affidavits is intirely discountenanced in the Court of King’s Bench, a fortiori in a court of equity.” (Lord Harwicke, Mellish -v- De Costa (1737) 2 ATk 14.