EXPERT WATCH 40: THE TRIAL JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EVIDENCE OF THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED WITNESS: “THE DUTY OF THE COURT IS TO APPLY THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND TO FIND THE FACTS HAVING REGARD TO ALL THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE…”
This is a case where the judge did not accept the views of a jointly instructed expert as to the authenticity of a document that was central to the case. The expert did not have access to all the relevant…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED AFTER CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: “THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE STRUCK OUT”
Here we look at the “second half” of the decision considered in the previous post. Having rejected the claimant’s submissions that breaches of a peremptory order should be considered under CPR 3.10 the judge then went on to consider the…
THE BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER IS A SERIOUS MATTER: IT CANNOT SIMPLY BE DEALT WITH UNDER CPR 3.10
Here we look at an interesting, but eventually futile, about the approach the court should take when a party was in breach of a peremptory order. The claimant in breach argued that the court should consider the matter under CPR…
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND RELIABILITY: THE WITNESS WHO USED “SMART GLASSES” TO ASSIST IN GIVING ANSWERS TO CROSS-EXAMINATION
Here we have a case where the judge made clear findings that a witness had been using “smart glasses” when giving answers to cross-examination in court. It is another example of how technology can be mis-used during the trial process…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: PLEADINGS SHOULD CONTAIN FACTS NOT ARGUMENT OR RHETORIC: (MARCH 2015)
The issues raised in the Current Importance of Pleadings series are not new. We see points as to pleading raised in March 2015. Here the judge considered a pleading that “leaves much to be desired.” “The overall result of these…
You must be logged in to post a comment.