WHEN AN EXPERT DECLAIMS A POINT “WITH A LEVEL OF SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY”: BUT THE HANDWRITING SAMPLE WAS NOT FROM THE CLAIMANT
There are plenty of examples of difficulties with expert’s giving evidence on this blog. Another example of problematic expert report can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in Packham v Wightman & Ors [2023] EWHC 1256 (KB)….
PROVING THINGS 255: HEARSAY NOTICE FROM AN ANONYMOUS CALLER HELPED DETERMINE KEY FINDINGS IN A CIVIL CASE: JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF THE CLAIMANT
The judgment of Her Honour Judge Howells (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Brown & Anor v Sestras & Ors [2023] EWHC 1220 (KB) is an interesting example of the use of hearsay, indeed anonymous evidence. An unknown…
THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (3): EMBARGOED JUDGMENTS – DON’T DISCLOSE EARLY TO ANYONE (LET ALONE THE LAWYER’S PR TEAM…)
The new guide has extended the section on embargoed judgments. This makes it absolutely clear that the disclosure of judgments to third parties (for example the lawyers’ PR teams) for the purpose of preparing a press release to publicise the…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY:”BLAMING LEGAL ADVISERS FOR LEGAL DOCUMENTATION”: A CASE IN POINT
The judgment of HHJ Richard Williams (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Rancom Security Ltd v Girling & Ors [2023] EWHC 1115 (Ch) provides an interesting example of the assessment of witness credibility. It also highlights the point that…
THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS
A new edition of the King’s Bench Division Guide was published last week (although it is dated March 2023). I will take a short look at the major changes. Firstly looking at a new passage in relation to the instruction…
PROVING THINGS 254: WHY YOU CAN NEVER BE CERTAIN ON BEING ABLE TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT QUESTIONABLE BUT STILL CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LOSS
There are plenty of examples in this series of claimants establishing breach of duty but failing on causation, particularly in the clinical negligence context. the judgment of Clare Padley (sitting as a High Court Judge) in J & J Franks…
PROVING THINGS 253: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE DAMAGES: £123,000 CLAIMED REDUCED TO £946 HIRE AND REPAIR COSTS NOT ESTABLISHED AT ALL
The judgment of HHJ Malek in Mehmood v AIG Europe Ltd & Anor [2023] EW Misc 1 (CC) is a classic – if not graphic – example of a failure to prove damages. The claimant made a claim for £123,000…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND PART 36: A USEFUL NOTE OF JUDGMENT
I am grateful to solicitor Bethan Parry from Browne Jacobson for sending me a note of the decision of HHJ Khan in Rix -v- Wall, the details of which are set out below. The note is interesting in that it…
BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE
In Rowbottom v The Estate of Peter Howard, Deceased & Anor [2023] EWHC 931 (KB) HHL Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) was critical of the role of one of the experts in the case. “A second reason…
Drafting witness statements the rules, the guidance and the cases: Webinar 18th APRIL 2023
Judges regularly complain that witness statements are inadequate and do not contain sufficient information, alternatively that they contain much information that is irrelevant and the witness is unable to give. This webinar looks in detail at the rules and practice…
PARTS OF THE EXPERT’S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT
In M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC 186 Recorder Reed set out the importance of an expert knowing, and complying with, the rules relating to the presentation of expert evidence. The judgment also emphasises the importance of the lawyers…
COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS
The principles relating to the court granting permission to a party to change expert were considered in detail by Mrs Justice O’Farrell in Avantage (Cheshire) Ltd & Ors v GB Building Solutions Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 802 (TCC). The…
PROVING THINGS 252: THE SOLICITORS WERE NEGLIGENT BUT THERE WAS NO LOSS: CLAIM DISMISSED
Many a salutary lesson can be learnt from the judgment of Mrs Justice Bacon in Cutlers Holdings Ltd & Anor v Shepherd And Wedderburn LLP [2023] EWHC 720 (Ch). It was a case about negligence in the conduct of litigation….
HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED
Issues relating to handwriting experts comprise a surprisingly large percentage of the search terms that lead to this blog. The question of the quality of such experts was considered by Master Clark in Watts v Watts [2023] EWHC 679 (Ch)….
PROVING THINGS 251: PROVING THAT YOU STOLE MY DRAGON IS NOT AN EASY TASK: FIRE BREATHING MONSTERS ARE A VERY OLD CONCEPT INDEED
In Evans v John Lewis Plc & Anor [2023] EWHC 766 (IPECP HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a High Court Judge) had to compare and contrast two fictional dragons. The claimant failed to establish that the defendants’ dragon was so…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY, MEMORY AND ACCURACY: REVISITING GESTMIN
This is another opportune time to re-visit the principles in Gestmin SGPS S.A. -v- Credit Suisse [2013] EWCA 3560 (Comm). This is case that is now mentioned regularly in cases involving witness recollection and dispute of facts. WHY LOOK AT GESTMIN?…
THE SERVICE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS LATE: CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: DEFENDANT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: EQUALITY IS NOT ALWAYS EQUITY
It is quite possible that both parties in an action could be in default. One party could be granted relief from sanctions for that default and the other refused. This is precisely what happened in Shill Properties Ltd v Bunch…
CROWING OVER COSTS IS NOT A GOOD LOOK FOR A LITIGANT: A REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA
We are looking again at the judgment of Lord Justice Underhill in Credico Marketing Ltd & Anor v Lambert & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 262. There is a very brief passage which serves as a reminder that clients can expect…
PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE
The judgment of Lord Justice Underhill (refusing permission to appeal) in Credico Marketing Ltd & Anor v Lambert & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 262 relates a party who failed to adduce sufficient evidence to show impecuniosity. “No evidence of Mr…
PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Cannon v Bar Standards Board [2023] EWCA Civ 278 the Court of Appeal held that expert evidence placed before it failed to establish that an appellant lacked capacity. The case provides importance guidance about the nature and quality of…
PERSONAL PEJORATIVE REMARKS IN WITNESS STATEMENTS DO NOT HELP: RECENT DECISIONS AND A REVIEW OF THE CASES
Some recent comments by HHJ Edward Hess in TM -V- KM [2022] EWFC 155 as to the language used in witness statements gives me a chance to reprise the guidance as to the lack of wisdom of using intemperate language…
EXPERTS IN COURT: THE DUTY TO POINT OUT CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS AND COMPLY WITH THE RULES
There have been a few cases recently where the actions of expert witnesses have come under the spotlight. I am grateful to barrister Henry Bankes-Jones for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Baucher in Arrassey Properties Limited…
PROVING THINGS 248: THERE WAS A BREACH BUT THE CLAIMANT PROVED NO LOSS: “BATTLE OF TRAFALGAR” DOES NOT LEAD TO VICTORY
In Jerroms Trafalgars Ltd & Anor v Tilson & Ors [2022] EWHC 1420 (ChD) HHJ Worster found that a claimant had failed to established that breaches by the Defendants led to any loss. It is a classic example of a…
COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE CAN HANDLE EXPERT WITNESSES AT EVERY POINT OF THE SPECTRUM
In Fawcett & Ors v TUI UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 400 (KB) Mr Dexter Dias KC (setting as a Deputy High Court Judge) refused the claimant’s application to exclude the defendant’s expert evidence. The matters to which the claimant objected…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A DEFENCE TO A CLAIM “BASED AT LEAST IN PART ON WISHFUL THINKING”
In Litkraft Ltd v Cottrell [2023] EWHC 465 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered issues relating to credibility and weight in a case where there had been non-compliance with the rules relating to witness statements. We…
WHEN ONLINE DISCUSSIONS THAT YOU NEVER THOUGHT WOULD BE MADE PUBLIC – GET SEEN: LAWYER’S TALES: “CHURN THAT BILL BABY”
Recent events have shown that even the most prominent people in public office can put material on social media sites that they assume will never be seen, and come to regret it. However politicians are not the only ones. This…
SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT’S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION
The judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Czernuszka v King [2023] EWHC 380 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the duty of care owed to those taking place in sporting activities. It also shows the important role of…
JUDGMENT OF A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY – BUT THIS CASE GOES MUCH FURTHER: COLLUSION IS FOUND
Here we are looking at a case where District Judge Lumb made a clear finding of fundamental dishonesty on the part of a personal injury claimant. That finding was confirmed, or perhaps compounded, by the judge’s views in relation to…
YOU’VE INSTRUCTED THE WRONG EXPERT: AND THIS HAS MAJOR CONSEQUENCES
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in GKE v Gunning [2023] EWHC 332 (KB). This time to look at the judge’s observations on the claimant’s expert on liability. The judge observed that the claimant had instructed the…
VULNERABLE WITNESSES IN THE CIVIL COURTS: THE VULNERABLE WITNESS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN SHOWN CROSS EXAMINATION QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE:
There are relatively few cases relating to vulnerable witnesses in civil courts. In GKE v Gunning [2023] EWHC 332 (KB) Mr Justice Ritchie considered the terms of an order made to protect a vulnerable witness. Although the wording of the…
“THE FOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE THE CAREFUL WORK OF A LEGAL TEAM”: JUDGE CRITICAL OF THE WAY STATEMENTS WERE PREPARED FOR TRIAL
There are many aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Mackenzie v Rosenblatt Solicitors & Anor [2023] EWHC 331 (Ch) that are of interest to litigators. However here we look at the judge’s criticisms of the witness statements…
THE JUDGE INTERRUPTED A BIT TOO MUCH… COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT
In Keane v Sargen & Ors [2023] EWCA Civ 141 the Court of Appeal commented that interruptions of the cross examination of a witness by the trial judge had not been helpful and, indeed, inappropriate. “I add a few words…
“HYPERBOLIC COMMENT” NOT WELCOME IN LITIGATION: HIGH COURT JUDGE SENDS OUT A WARNING: PLANE LANGUAGE IS BEST…
In Peregrine Aviation Bravo Ltd & Ors v Laudamotion GmbH & Anor [2023] EWHC 48 (Comm) Mr Justice Henshaw was critical of “hyperbolic comment” in relation to the witness evidence. This is not the first time that a judge has…
PROVING THINGS 246: WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE MATCHES NEITHER THE PLEADINGS NOR THE CONTEMPORARY RECORDS
We are looking again at the judgment in Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 from a slightly different stance. The appeal was about QOCS and setting aside a notice of discontinuance. However the process that led…
COMMENTING ON A DRAFT JUDGMENT – WHEN THE JUDGE HAS ASKED YOU TO: THE CIRCULATION OF A DRAFT JUDGMENT IS NOT THE END OF THE BEGINNING OF THE LITIGATION BUT THE BEGINNING OF THE END
There have been several cases over the years where judges have commented on the practice of parties attempting to rewrite draft judgments. In Energy Works (Hull) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 3275 (TCC)…
PROVING THINGS 245: DEFENDANTS FLOORED: THEY FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT DISCLOSURE GIVEN INADVERTENTLY “ON THIS QUESTION, THE EVIDENCE BEFORE ME FROM THE DEFENDANTS IS LIMITED AND UNSATISFACTORY”
In Flowcrete UK Ltd & Ors v Vebro Polymers UK Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 22 (Comm) Mr Nigel Cooper KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused the defendants’ application to prevent the claimant from using certain documents that…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: KING CRIMSON, KANYE WEST: CONSIDERATION OF THE PRINCIPLES (AND THE COSTS): WE ARE IN THE 21st CENTURY NOW
In Declan Colgan Music Ltd v Umg Recordings, Inc [2023] EWHC 4 (Ch) Deputy Master Henderson refused the claimant’s application for permission to call expert evidence in relation to the construction and consequences of an agreement to licence music. There…
A CLEAR WARNING FOR THOSE WHO SIGN WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOLICITORS WHO SIGN STATEMENTS OF COMPLIANCE: IT IS NOT A JUNGLE OUT THERE
In Cumbria Zoo Company Ltd v The Zoo Investment Company Ltd [2022] EWHC 3379 (Ch) HHJ Pearce sent out an important message to those who sign witness statements. He also sent out an, arguably more important message, to those solicitors…
IF YOU DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES RELATING TO WITNESS STATEMENTS YOUR CASE CAN (AND THIS CASE DID) GO DOWN THE DRAIN
In Brendon International Ltd v Water Plus Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 3321 (Ch)HHJ Cadwallader (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that numerous elements of the defendant’s witness statements were defective and non-compliant with the rules. The case is…
PROVING THINGS 244 (& COST BITES 39): WHY COSTS LAWYERS HAVE TO KNOW ABOUT PROVING THINGS
We are returning to the decision on Mr Justice Cavanagh in Shepherd & Co Solicitors v Brealey [2022] EWHC 3229 (KB) to consider another aspect of the rules relating to costs. The solicitors were seeking to persuade the court to…
CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE ON DEPUTYSHIP AND COURT OF PROTECTION COSTS: SUCCESSFUL APPEAL TO THE HIGH COURT
I am grateful to Daniel Slade from Express Solicitors for sending me a copy of the decision of Mr Justice Soole in AAA -v- BBB [2022] EWHC 3103 (KB). It is a case where the claimant was successful in appealing…
PROVING THINGS 243: ITS WITNESSES THAT COUNT IN FINDING PRIMARY FACTS, NOT EXPERTS
The Court of Appeal judgment today in Taylor & Anor v Raspin [2022] EWCA Civ 1613 emphasises the difficulty in appealing findings of fact. The Court also took a little time to point out the limited role of experts in…
EXPERTS: A PARTY CANNOT INSIST THAT A SINGLE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT BE MALE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In N (A Child), Re (Instruction of Expert) [2022] EWCA Civ 1588 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that a single joint expert should have been male. The judgment emphasises the point that a party wishing to argue for…
WHEN YOU DON’T CALL THE OTHER SIDE’S EXPERTS TO COURT, BUT WANT TO CHALLENGE THEIR CONCLUSIONS: ANOTHER CASE
The post yesterday dealt with a case where the claimants failed in its attempt to go behind the defendant’s experts in a case where the claimants’ expert was never disclosed. Similar issues were considered in the interesting decision of the…
WHEN YOU HAVEN’T CALLED YOUR OWN EXPERT BUT WANT TO CRITIQUE THE EXPERT FOR THE OTHER SIDE: THIS IS NEVER GOING TO BE EASY
In White & Ors v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2022] EWHC 3082 (KB) Jeremy Hyam KC (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) considered the issues that arise when a party has not called…
THE COURT CANNOT COMPEL A PARTY TO CALL A WITNESS: “PARTY AUTONOMY IS PARAMOUNT”
In QX v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWCA Civ 1541 (22 November 2022) the Court of Appeal held that the courts have no power to compel a party to call a witness. “The starting proposition must…
EVIDENCE OF STATISTICS FROM DEFENDANTS’ SOLICITORS RELATING TO CLAIMS NOT EXCLUDED: HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Kerseviciene v Quadri & Anor [2022] EWHC 2951 (KB) is of considerable interest to anyone involved in litigation, particular personal injury litigation. The judge upheld a finding that a witness statement from the…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 94: CLAIMANTS – DO NOT SHOW APPROVAL ADVICES TO THE DEFENDANT
An issue I have seen periodically, but twice this week, is a belief by some claimant solicitors that an advice obtained for the purpose of approval of a civil action for a protected party has to be shown to the…
PROVING THINGS 242: A SOLICITOR’S SHORTHAND NOTE OF WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MAGISTRATES’ COURT IS NOT GOING TO CARRY ANY WEIGHT AT ALL
The judgment of Mr Justice Garnham in Correia v Williams [2022] EWHC 2824 (KB), was looked at yesterday on this blog. The judgment also contains an interesting approach to civil evidence at trial. The claimant’s solicitor prepared a witness statement annexing her…
APPEAL COURT UPHOLDS TRIAL JUDGE’S DECISION TO REFUSE TO ADMIT WITNESS STATEMENT OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE SPEAKER THAT HAD NOT BEEN DRAFTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES
I am grateful to barrister Jake Rowley for drawing my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Garnham in Correia v Williams [2022] EWHC 2824 (KB). Mr Justice Garnham refused an appeal when a judge had held that a witness…
You must be logged in to post a comment.