2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (1): BUNDLES
I am sorry to be starting the annual review of procedure so early, but December is a busy month and there is a lot to fit in. I’ll start with the subject that has constantly drawn the most readers to…
MAKING FINDINGS ON THE BASIS OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENTS ALONE: THE MACKENZIE PERPLEX
There is one aspect of the judgement in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 that requires a little more attention. That is is the question of how parties, faced with the absence of documents and where…
CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – NOVEMBER 2019
Here we have links to blogs and articles about civil procedure and costs from November 2019. COSTS Costs Barrister Blaming others Costs Barrister The undiscovered country Herbert Smith Freehills Court of Appeal confirms jurisdiction to award claimant interim payment on account of costs…
WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 makes some important points in relation to civil evidence. It reviews the law relating to the drawing of adverse inferences due…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 72: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE AND GIVE REASON FOR THEIR VIEWS (A MANDATORY OBLIGATION MORE HONOURED IN THE BREACH…)
The recent post on the decision in Ashley Wilde Group Ltd v BCPL Ltd [2019] EWHC 3166 (IPEC) highlights a common omission from many expert reports. The expert’s duty to consider whether there is a range of opinion and to give…
EXPERTS, IMPARTIALITY AND CELEBRITY BEDSPREADS: BE CAREFUL OF THE WAY YOU INSTRUCT EXPERTS AND YOU MAY SLEEP TIGHTLY (YOU SHOULD BE SO LUCKY)
In Ashley Wilde Group Ltd v BCPL Ltd [2019] EWHC 3166 (IPEC) HHJ Melissa Clarke considered, and was critical of, the way in which an expert was instructed. The difficulty was that the appointed expert moved from “hired gun” hired…
WHEN WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: THIS RARELY TURNS OUT WELL: (WHEN THEY SIGN THE SAME STATEMENT, IT COULD BE WORSE…)
There has been a brief exchange on Twitter this morning. Someone has been served with a single witness statement – signed by three people. There are manifest breaches of the rules here. It is another example of a statement being…
NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE’S DECISION
In L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor v Liqwd Inc & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1943 the Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s decision not to admit new evidence that a defendant attempted to introduce after judgment was handed down….
PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESSES
There are a number of interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Coe in Esegbona v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (false imprisonment in hospital) [2019] EWHC 77 (QB). One of which is the defendant’s failure to call any…
THE SELF INFLICTED WOUNDS OF A “TRUSTED BRAND”/”CAPRICIOUS MID-VICTORIAN FACTORY-OWNER”: THE DANGERS OF PUTTING YOUR CASE TOO HIGH
The judgment of Lord Justice Coulson rejecting the Post Office’s application for permission to appeal is available on “Post Office Trial“, a case that has already been looked at several times on this blog. Here we have a critical appraisal…
WHEN WHATSAPP PROVES THAT THIS WAS NOT A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP: NOT SO ROMANTIC PARTNER ORDERED TO REPAY £67,000
I am grateful to barrister James Miller for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Gosnell in Riaz -v- Akbar (19th November 2019) a copy of which is available here. This is an interesting example of a judge…
LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL…): MASTER’S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING
There are some observations in the judgment of Master Thornett in Palizban v Protech (UK) Ltd [2019] EWHC 3090 (QB) that every litigator should read. It relates to the manner in which solicitors present witness statements, and documents, in interlocutory…
ANONYMOUS LITIGANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: “ALL THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE MILITATE AGAINST GRANTING THE CLAIMANT RELIEF”
In ABC v Google LLC [2019] EWHC 3020 (QB) Mr Justice Pushpinder Saini refused an (anonymous) claimants application for relief from sanctions. The case has some unusual features, however it does highlight the point that a relief from sanctions application…
STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Wickes Building Supplies Ltd v Blair [2019] EWCA Civ 1934 is an important one in relation to late service of evidence and Stage 3 of the Protocol. It shows the importance…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 70: OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS
There have been several recent cases in which the courts have emphasised the difference between knowledge and “opinion” in witness evidence. In Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 the Court of Appeal dismissed an argument that the defendant was…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 69 : SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE LITIGATOR: A RECAP
The earlier post on the judgment last Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 was another case in which social media played a part. The defendant holiday company found social media entries which appeared inconsistent…
COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE BROUGHT IN RELATION TO PRE-ACTION WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE AMENDED TO ALLEGE FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE IN THE COURSE OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS
In Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 the Court of Appeal held that committal proceedings can be brought in relation to allegedly false witness statements made and disclosed under the pre-action protocols. It is…
SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN’T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?
The danger of witness statements from solicitors purporting to give evidence as to fact has been emphasised many times in the cases reported on the blog. The danger can be seen again in the judgment of Ms Pat Treacy (sitting…
PROVING FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY – WHEN NEITHER THE CLAIMANT OR DEFENDANT ARE IN COURT: TELEMATIC EVIDENCE – NOW HERE’S A THING
I am grateful to barrister Mark Roberts for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Gargan in Wise -v- Hegarty & Alpha Insurance (9th July 2019) a copy of which is available here. OT APPROVED CRAWFORD D10YJ706 WISE…
PROVING THINGS 168: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION:STATEMENTS OF OPINION OR BELIEF CARRY NO WEIGHT
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 adds to the Proving Things series in relation to a failure to establish key matters at trial (it also gives me an opportunity to promote the…
