MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE: LOOKING BACK TO THE CASE OF THE YEAR 2019
Yesterday I noticed that a post I had written in 2019 was suddenly gaining a lot of readers. I suspect that this was due to the power of television. Not that the blog was being advertised, but that the series…
CIVIL LITIGATION 2023: A BRIEF REVIEW
I am not sure whether the facts and figures from this site can show any major trends in civil litigation. Here is a quick look back at some numbers from 2023. MOST VIEWED POSTS: THE TOP 10 (to date)…
USING AI TO SEARCH FOR CASE LAW AND MAKE SUBMISSIONS: IT MAKES CASES UP – IT REALLY DOES
If ever there was a judgment where the clue is in the name it is Harber v Commissioners for His Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (INCOME TAX – penalties for failure to notify liability to CGT – appellant relied on case…
GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT
In a judgment today TUI UK Ltd v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48 the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the majority of the Court of Appeal. It is an important decision on procedural fairness. In particular the duty of a…
EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: WEBINAR 24TH JANUARY 2024: ESSENTIAL ISSUES FOR ALL LITIGATORS AND EXPERTS
Over the course of 2023 we saw many cases in which the conduct of experts and those who instruct them came under close scrutiny and criticism in the courts. I am presenting a webinar on the 24th January 2024 reviewing…
COSTS OF £50,000 ORDERED TO BE PAID BY LITIGATION FRIEND: “HE WILLINGLY TOOK ON THE ROLE OF LITIGATION FRIEND AND HIS PERFORMANCE HAS BEEN WHOLLY INADEQUATE”
In Y v Z [2023] EWFC 205 HHJ Edward Hess ordered that the litigation friend for the respondent pay, personally, the applicant’s costs caused by the need to adjourn a hearing. The respondent had not prepared at all for the…
WHY DIDN’T YOU TELL ME THAT BEFORE WE WENT INTO COURT? THINGS LAWYERS LEARN HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL: A REPOST
The repost last week of a case where key facts came to light on the third day of a trial led me another post on the topic which is worth revisiting. After the first post was written I asked lawyers if…
THE THINGS YOU FIND OUT HALF WAY THROUGH A TRIAL… A CASE VERY MUCH TO POINT: A REPOST
As part of the process of re-blogging posts that remain of general interest we are looking again at the case of Jollah, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No. 2) [2017] EWHC 2821 (Admin)…
DOES WHAT YOU WEAR MATTER? GUIDANCE FOR ADVOCATES AND LITIGANTS: ANOTHER ISSUE REVISITED
This is a part of the series revisiting previous posts. Here we go back to November 2018. The question was asked – does how you dress affect how you are perceived? This followed a tweet (from the USA) where a …
PROVING THINGS 235: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF DEFENDANT: THE JUDGE’S FINDINGS WERE NOT OPEN TO HIM: THE FACTUAL FINDINGS WERE WRONG
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Clements-Siddall v Dunbobbin Hotels Ltd [2023] EWCA Civ 1300 is a rare example of the Court of Appeal overturning a judge’s findings on the facts. It is also an example of the importance…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 100: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A REMINDER OF THE KEY POINTS IN GESTMIN
Now that we have reached 100 it is a good time to revisit the basic issue of how the court assesses witness credibility. We are therefore looking at the basic guidance given in Gestmin SGPS SA v Credit Suisse (UK) Limited…
PROVING THINGS 234: REMOTE EVIDENCE FROM OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION: PARTY CALLING WITNESSES HITS A PROBLEM
The judgment of Deputy District Judge Batstone in Amanda Seafood PTE Ltd v Sykes Seafood Ltd [2023] EW Misc 13 (CC) illustrates the care that needs to be taken when attempting to call a witness who is giving evidence remotely…
LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON’T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON’T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS
The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB) shows a surprising set of facts when an expert wrote directly to the court. The expert made it clear that he was not…
WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR…
Early next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages. The series looks at the major heads of damages for personal injury and clinical negligence cases, with a particular emphasis on those claims in the…
CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)
In Wambura & Ors v Barrick TZ Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB) Master Stevens rejected the claimants’ application to call an expert. The judge contains a detailed consideration of the law and authorities relating to the court’s discretion…
THE 10TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE HANDBOOK FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON: A REMINDER OF THE FOUR GOLDEN RULES FOR DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS
It is ten years since the publication of the Handbook for Litigants in Person. It can be found here. I wrote about it, briefly, when it was first published. Although there have been some procedural changes since the section on…
PROVING THINGS 233: THE DEFENDANT WAS NEGLIGENT – BUT THE DAMAGES ARE NIL
In Hope Capital Ltd v Alexander Reece Thomson LLP [2023] EWHC 2389 (KB) Mr Justice Constable found that the claimant had suffered no loss. This could be an expensive loss for the claimant, after a seven day trial. “”For these…
PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE
One of the issues decided by Mr Justice Mellor in Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2023] EWHC 2408 (Ch) related to the attempts by a party (COPA) to adduce expert evidence from other trials by way of hearsay evidence…
DELAYS, ADJOURNMENTS AND THE SIZE OF THE TRIAL BUNDLE: NOT JUST AN ACADEMIC PROBLEM: ELECTRONIC BUNDLES DOESN’T MEAN YOU CAN JUST THROW EVERYTHING IN
The judgment of Mr Justice Constable in Innovate Pharmaceuticals Ltd v University of Portsmouth Higher Education Corporation [2023] EWHC 2394 (TCC) contains another interesting insight into the preparation of trial bundles and how that, in itself, can become highly contentious. …
AN EXPERT SHOULD HAVE EXPERTISE IN THE ISSUE THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE ON: THEY CAN’T SIMPLY TEACH THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CASE
There are some important observations on expert evidence in the judgment of Mrs Justice Bacon in Sycurio Ltd v PCI-Pal PLC & Anor [2023] EWHC 2161 (Pat). An expert must give evidence within the scope of their expertise. To assert…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 99: THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TOP RIGHT HAND CORNER OF A WITNESS STATEMENT AND AFFIDAVIT
The purpose of this series is to look at the most basic elements of civil procedure. One, very common, omission practitioners make is to fail to follow the mandatory requirements of Practice Direction 32 in relation to the information on…
PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM “MUST” TO “MORE THAN PROBABLE” REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE
The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Nash v Volskwagen Financial Services (UK) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2326 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the law and evidence relating to causation. However I want to look at the judge’s consideration…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FRAGILITY OF MEMORY AND THE DANGERS THIS POSES
A major issue at most trials is the question of what a witness can actual “remember”. How much of a witness statement is genuine recollection and how much is implanted? Much judicial time is spent in considering this question. There…
THE COVER UP IS INVARIABLY WORSE THAN THE ERROR: WHAT TO DO WHEN MISTAKES ARE MADE
The post earlier this week based on the article by the Honourable Joseph Quinn led to to look in detail at one point made – that of avoiding a “cover up” and acting immediately to deal with mistakes. This led…
SOCIAL MEDIA AND LITIGATION: THE RETIRED JUDGE’S VIEW: “THE WORLD’S PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR – ON RETAINER FOR EVERYONE”
Over many years this blog has looked at several judgments and articles, by the Canadian judge, The Honourable Joseph Quinn. I refer people often to Things Lawyers do to Annoy Judges, and the judgment in Hearing Clinic (Niagara Falls) Inc…
WHEN LAWYERS GIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IS ESSENTIAL
We are looking back at a post in 2019. Primarily because the issues the case raises in relation to lawyers making witness statements are prevalent. There are numerous examples on this blog of the difficulties that can occur when a…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, PART 18 QUESTIONS AND CASE MANAGEMENT: THE MASTER WAS RIGHT TO ORDER THE CLAIMANT TO DISCLOSE HIS WITNESS EVIDENCE FIRST
It has taken to the third time of writing about the decision in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB) to get to the detail of what the appeal was actually about. This part of the judgment is important…
EXPERTS: WHY IT IS UNWISE FOR A CLAIMANT TO BE AT A JOINT MEETING ON SITE: WHO SAYS YOU ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO CALL EXPERT EVIDENCE ANYWAY? HIGH COURT DECISION
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Jennings v Otis Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB). This time looking at the observations made in relation to experts. Firstly it was unwise for a claimant to be present,…
THE IMPORTANCE OF TAKING FULL WITNESS STATEMENTS: A RECAP: IF A FULLER WITNESS STATEMENT HAD BEEN TAKEN THE LOSS AT TRIAL COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED
As part of the series looking back at previous posts we are revisiting a case first looked at in 2014. It provides a good example of the very real dangers of not taking a comprehensive statement. A witness was interviewed…
PROVING THINGS 231: “WITNESS STATEMENTS” THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT
In Cheshire Estate and legal Limited -v- Blanchfield & Others* HHJ Bever, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, considered witness statements served by the claimant that failed to comply with the Practice Direction. One was expert evidence posing…
“LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”: A RECENT CASE AND A RECAP : SOMETHING ALL LITIGATORS MUST BEAR IN MIND WHEN CONSIDERING WITNESS EVIDENCE
Many witnesses give inaccurate evidence. Sometimes this is due to dishonesty, others are mistaken. Many, it is to be suspected, fall foul of “litigation wishful thinking”. This concept was explored by Mr Justice Richards in Old Park Capital Maestro Fund…
EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: THE DUTY TO INFORM EXPERTS OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO INFORM THE COURT AND PARTIES OF A CHANGE OF VIEWS
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) (A copy of the judgment, on Old Square Chambers website, is available here.) Again we are looking at the judge’s comments…
WHEN IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THE STATEMENT IS NOT IN THE WORDS THAT WITNESS WOULD USE: A REMINDER OF THE DANGERS
There is a short passage in the judgment of Costs Judge Leonard in Pulford v Hughes Fowler Carruthers Ltd [2023] EWHC 1429 (SCCO)that is illustrative of the dangers of “lawyerly” witness statement. THE CASE The judge was considering issues of…
A MULTI-LINGUAL WITNESS IS NOT COMPELLED TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN THEIR “FIRST LANGUAGE”: DECISION PREVENTING CLAIMANT GIVING EVIDENCE OVERTURNED ON APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT
I am grateful to Ten Legal Associates Ltd for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Afzal -v- UK Insurance Ltd [2023] EWHC 1730 (KB), a copy of that judgment is available here. AFZALJUDGMENT TRANSCRIPT …
A LICENCE TO THRILL: JAMES BOND, THE MOVIES AND THE COURTS: LEGAL TALES THAT WON’T SCARE THE LIVING DAYLIGHTS OUT OF YOU
This morning I am encouraging you to read ‘James Bond and the Law’ : A talk to the Manchester Business and Property Courts Forum [2023] UKSpeech 7REH2, given by Mr Justice Foxton. A look through at the James Bond franchise…
EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: “A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE… WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED”
In Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter sent out another warning about the inadequate state of expert reports. Here we look at the judgment in relation to the care experts. (A copy of…
A THUMBS UP EMOJI LED TO A BINDING CONTRACT: LESSONS FROM CANADA
In South West Terminal Ltd. v Achter Land, 2023 SKKB 116 (CanLII) Keene J. decided that a thumbs up emoji “👍” led to a binding contract being created. The case is mentioned in Legal Cheek here and has led to…
REDACTION OF DOCUMENTS SHOULD NOT BE ROUTINE: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION
In FMA & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWHC 1579 (Admin) Mr Justice Swift made the point the redaction of documents in judicial review proceedings should not be routine. THE CASE The judge was…
UNSUCCESSFUL RESPONDENT CANNOT INTRODUCE NEW EVIDENCE AFTER DRAFT JUDGMENT HANDED DOWN
In Manolete Partners Plc v White [2023] EWHC 1644 (Ch) HHJ Hodge KC (sitting as a High Court judge) considered an application to adduce further evidence after a draft judgment had been circulated. The application was refused. The respondent was…
PROVING THINGS 230: WATCH THE METADATA: IF THERE ARE DIFFERENT DATES THEN THIS REQUIRES AN EXPLANATION
In Adams & Ors v FS Capital Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1649 (Ch) Mr Justice Edwin Johnson commented on the difficulties caused by the defendants’ failure to establish why the metadata for documents was different to the dates shown…
FOUR INTERESTING POSTS ON EXPERTS: HOW TO CROSS-EXAMINE, HOW TO INSTRUCT, DON’T BE LATE AND – WHATEVER YOU DO – DON’T DO THIS
Expert evidence has been a regular feature on this blog. Here we are looking at four posts from June 2014 which give rise to issues that resonate today. Advice on cross-examining experts, consideration of instructing experts, an attempt to introduce…
PROVING THINGS 229: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE CERTAIN HEADS OF DAMAGES: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL
The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Lal v Reeder [2023] EWHC 1437 (KB) is a classic example of a failure to prove things. The trial judge found that the claimant had failed to establish certain heads of damage. That…
PROVING THINGS 228: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS “IN ALMOST IDENTICAL FORMAT” FAIL TO BRING HOME THE DOUGH
The judgment of Lionel Persey KC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) in Finsbury Food Group Plc v Axis Corporate Capital UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 1559 (Comm) shows some significant issues in relation to the evidence presented in…
ON THIS BLOG 10 YEARS AGO: PART 36; INTERIM PAYMENTS AND SUING THE “MAN OF STRAW”
Now that the blog is 10 years (and 2 days) old it gives me an opportunity to look back at previous posts in a way that remains useful. Some (but not all) of the posts over the past decade stand…
USING TRANSLATORS: COURT HEARINGS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHERE CAN IT ALL GO WRONG
In Alam v Alam & Anor [2023] EWHC 1460 (Ch) the Court had to deal with issues relating to translators and witness statements. There were several issues in relation to the use of translators. The evidence of one witness was…
THE DANGERS OF ACCIDENTALLY DISCLOSING WITHOUT PREJUDICE OFFERS: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS “HANDED A BOOBY-TRAPPED BUNDLE”
The judgment of Sir Jonathan Cohen in Koukash v Koukash [2022] EWHC 1001 (Fam) underlines the importance of keeping without prejudice offers out of the sight of the trial judge. A finding in a family case was overturned because one…
BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL: THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND
We have looked at the decision in relation to costs in the case of ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Anor [2023] EWHC 986 (KB) in an earlier post. The decision on costs, and the primary judgment on…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 97: GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: 10 BASIC POINTS
This is not the first time that this series has dealt with this issue. The post earlier this week on the judgment in MF Tel Sarl v Visa Europe Ltd [2023] EWHC 1336 (Ch) shows that it is a regular issue….
DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS CONSIDERED: THE MAKER OF THE STATEMENT MUST GIVE THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
The judgment in MF Tel Sarl v Visa Europe Ltd [2023] EWHC 1336 (Ch) records it was before “Master Marsh (sitting in retirement). However the Master has lost none of his pre-retirement keenness for ensuring that parties filing witness statements…
PROVING THINGS 226: PROVING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE (AND A WEBINAR ON THAT VERY SUBJECT…)
There is often very little attention paid to judgments in relation to contributory negligence. Commentators tend to concentrate, on the whole, on primary liability. If considered at all contributory negligence is often an after thought – a “finding on the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.