LIFE IN LAW ISN’T ALWAYS GLAMOROUS: A CLIENT CAN BLAME THEIR LAWYER (OR FORMER LAWYER) FOR THEIR WITNESS STATEMENT
A classic example of a client seeking to blame their lawyer for the contents of a witness statement can be seen in the judgment in Simpson v Payne, reported in the PI Brief Update Law Journal. THE CASE The claimant…
PROVING THINGS 183: WHERE DOES THE BURDEN OF PROOF LIE IN A HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE CASE?
In Smithson v Lynn & Anor [2020] EWHC 2517 (QB) HHJ Gosnell (sitting as a High Court Judge) found a highway authority partially responsible for an accident in failing to maintain the roads. The are interesting issues relating to the…
TEN MORE PIECES OF ADVICE FOR THE YOUNG LAWYER: “INCIVILITY IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE”: “BE BRIEF”; “DON’T CRUMBLE”
I am using this week to look back a previous series where guidance was given, primarily by judges, to young advocates. There are links here to the original posts, and sources for the posts. Here we look at the second…
WITNESSES AT SEA: EVIDENCE FROM THE HIGH SEAS
The judgment of Mr Justice Teare (sitting with two assessors) in Sakizaya Kalon, Owners of The Vessel v Panamax Alexander, Owners of The Vessel [2020] EWHC 2604 (Admlty) shows some real advantages of being able to take witness evidence remotely. …
EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND THE PRACTICAL JOKER: THE “LOWEST FORM OF HUMOUR” DOES NOT LEAD TO VICARIOUS LIABILITY
In Chell v Tarmac Cement And Lime Ltd [2020] EWHC 2613 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer upheld a decision that an employer was not vicariously liable for a practical joke in the workplace. “The practical joke must be the lowest…
WHAT THEY DIDN’T TEACH YOU AT LAW SCHOOL: 10 KEY POSTS FOR THOSE JUST STARTING OFF (AND THE REST OF US TO BE HONEST)
The transition from learning to practice is not an easy one. It is even more difficult for litigators starting their careers now – with training contracts and pupillage being delayed because of COVID problems. Even if training has started much…
BROKEN PROMISES: PROPRIETARY ESTOPPEL IN THE MODERN WORLD: ONLINE EVENT 15th OCTOBER 2020
Several of my colleagues are taking place in this online event. Proprietary estoppel has become important in recent years in relation the ownership and transfer of property. There are many recent cases relating to farming families in particular, they give…
VIDEO EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED AT TRIAL: APPEAL AGAINST REFUSAL DISMISSED: A “STORM IN A TEACUP”
In Wilcox v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 2555 (QB) Mrs Justice Lambert dismissed an appeal against a refusal by a defendant to allow video evidence to be adduced at trial. The evidence was not relevant and…
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND COUNTER-SCHEDULE STRUCK OUT AS INADMISSIBLE: THE PRINCIPLES APPLIED
In Rahman v Rahman & Ors [2020] EWHC 2392 (Ch) Master Clark struck out part of the defendants’ witness evidence and counter-schedule. The judgment provides a useful summary of when the court will strike out evidence and statements of case….
PART 18 REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT DAMAGES REFUSED: “NEITHER REASONABLE OR PROPORTIONATE”
In Kings Security Systems Ltd v King & Anor [2019] EWHC 3620 (Ch) Master Kaye refused an application that a party provide further information in relation to damages. “Part 18 requests should be for the purpose of providing further information…
JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION TO ADJOURN AND NOT TO ALLOW SINGLE WITNESS IN PLACE OF JOINT WITNESS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Hinson v Hare Realizations Ltd (2) [2020] EWHC 2386 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer refused a claimant’s appeal where it was argued that a trial judge should have adjourned a trial and given the claimant permission to rely on…
“LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”: A REMINDER OF ITS IMPORTANCE
This blog has looked many times at those cases where a case is determined by the judge’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses. This does not always (or event often) mean that the losing side are not telling the…
PROVING THINGS 182: FAILING TO PROVE A CONTRACT WAS SIGNED AND GETTING DAMAGES OF £1: NOT A GREAT RESULT FOR A CLAIMANT
The judgment of JJH Melissa Clarke, sitting as a High Court Judge, in DPA (London) Ltd v D’Aguanno & Ors [2020] EWHC 2374 (IPEC) is a classic example of failing to prove key matters in a claim. Firstly the claimant…
SIMILAR WITNESS STATEMENTS (WITH THE SAME TYPOS) AND WITNESS CONFERRING WITH OTHERS: WHY “I SAY THE SAME AS THEM” RARELY HELPS
In the judgment today in Dr Jones Yeovil Ltd v The Stepping Stone Group Ltd [2020] EWHC 2308 (TCC) HHJ Russen QC (sitting as a High Court judge) made some observations about the witnesses giving evidence. The fact that some…
“PREPARED IN A WAY THAT MAKES ME ASHAMED OF MY PROFESSION”: ENSURING WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE ACCURATE IS AN IMPORTANT TASK – IF YOU WANT TO KEEP YOUR JOB…
There are nearly 800 posts on this blog that deal with issues relating to witness statements. The importance of ensuring that a statement is accurate is seen in the judgment of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal in SRA -v- Gilfillan, available…
CIVIL PROCEDURE (NOT-CORONAVIRUS): BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – AUGUST 2020
A round up of blogs and articles about procedure, evidence and damages published in August 2020. Costs DAC Beachcroft – Beware of costs sanctions if your conduct falls out of line Costs Barrister – Crypto tokens and litigation funding ACL – Claimant debarred…
CHALLENGING THE AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: A REMINDER OF THE BASIC RULES: IF YOU DON’T DISPUTE YOU ARE DEEMED TO ADMIT AUTHENTICITY
Earlier posts have looked at the importance of serving a notice of non-admittance of the authenticity of documents promptly. Here we look at the basics of the rule. Put bluntly if you do not serve a notice that you wish…
EXPERT EVIDENCE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THE TRIAL JUDGE CANNOT OVERTURN CONCLUSIONS OF A “UNCONTROVERTED” EXPERT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
In Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the question of the approach of the trial judge to “uncontroverted” expert evidence. He overturned the decision of the trial judge in favour of the…
SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE: AN OVERVIEW AND THE CASES: THE RELEVANT GUIDANCE CONSIDERED
The previous post about the Court of Appeal decision today in relation to similar fact evidence provides an opportunity to recap on some basic principles. OVERVIEW OF THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES A detailed review of the cases appears below. By…
PROVING PROPENSITY AND SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL CASES: COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT TODAY
In the judgment today in R v P (Children: Similar Fact Evidence) [2020] EWCA Civ 1088 the Court of Appeal set out the principles relating to similar fact evidence in civil and family cases. The case is also an example…