THE ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS IN FINDING FACTS AND ASSESSING CREDIBILITY
The recent posts on the assessment of witness credibility led an expert witness to enquire whether it was the function of an expert to comment on issues relating to credibility. There have been a number of cases where judges have…
MORE ON WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREDIBILITY IS MORE THAN DEMEANOUR: PLAUSABILITY “IS ALSO THE HALLMARK OF THE CONFIDENCE TRICKSTER DOWN THE AGES”
The previous post looked at witness credibility and the Gestmin principles. Litigators will also benefit enormously from reading the talk given at Bristol University Law School in December 2014 by Mr Justice Mostyn “The Craft of Judging and Legal Reasoning”. …
WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A SUMMARY OF THE APPROACH IN GESTMIN
A post last week dealt with issues relating to the judicial assessment of credibility. Here we look at one aspect of that in more detail. That is the decision in Gestmin SGPS SA v Credit Suisse (UK) Ltd & Anor…
THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF ANY WITNESS STATEMENT: 10 KEY POINTS
This week the blog looks at some basic procedural issues. Today we are looking at witness statements, in particular the mandatory requirement that a witness give the source of their information or belief. There are many cases where this basic…
JUST BECAUSE A MATTER IS TECHNICALLY COMPLICATED DOES NOT MEAN THAT EXPERTS NEED ATTEND TRIAL
In Siemens Mobility Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd [2022] EWHC 2190 (TCC) Mrs Justice O’Farrell considered an argument that the technical issues that arose in an action led to the need for experts to attend court. This argument…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY IN CIVIL LITIGATION: A REMINDER OF SOME KEY POINTS
Many, if not most, civil cases that get to trial rest on issues of witness credibility rather than issues of law. These are the cases and decisions that rarely make the law reports, but do reflect the underlying reality of…
AN EXPERT WHO TENDED TOWARDS BEING AN ADVOCATE: YOU SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT IN ANOTHER CASE: THE NEED FOR A MEASURED RESPONSE
It may be indicative that there are such a large number of cases where judges have criticised experts for veering towards advocacy that I sometimes hesitate as to whether they merit writing about. However such a tendency was noted by…
PROVING THINGS 235: PROVING SERVICE: COUNCIL’S WHOLESALE FAILURE TO SERVE CLAIM FORMS PROPERLY: ATTEMPTS AT PERSONAL SERVICE WERE A PREREQUISITE TO SERVICE BY ALTERNATIVE MEANS
An important point as to service of the claim form arose in the judgment of Mr Justice Nicklin in Thurrock Council v Stokes & Ors [2022] EWHC 1998 (QB). The claimant had issued proceedings against multiple defendants. It obtained an…
THERE IS NO OBLIGATION ON A CLAIMANT TO FILE A REPLY: THE BURDEN OF PROOF REMAINS WITH THE DEFENDANT
In Pistachios In the Park Ltd & Anor v Sharn Panesar Ltd [2022] EWHC 2088 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman pointed out that the appellant’s argument in relation to pleading and burden of proof ran contrary to the rules. There is…
“MISSING” WHATSAPP POSTS AND A PHONE LOST AT SEA: WHAT INFERENCES WOULD THE COURT DRAW?
The facts in Vardy v Rooney [2022] EWHC 2017 (QB) are well known and have received wide publicity. Here we look solely at the evidential issues relating to the “missing” evidence. In particular the amount of WhatsApp material that went…
PROVING THINGS 234: PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION FOR DELAY BY EVIDENCE – NOT BY SUBMISSIONS
The judgment of Mr Justice Henshaw in Hays & Ors v Bloomfield Investments LLC [2022] EWHC 1648 (Comm) was on a very specific area of procedure. However there is one matter of more general interest. The need to have evidence…
Witness statements in the client’s own words: Witness statements when the client’s first language is not English: Webinar today
I am giving a webinar on the 25th July 2022 at 12.00 on “Witness statements in the client’s own words: Witness statements when the client’s first language is not English.” Booking details can be found here. (The webinar will be…
YOU CAN’T RAISE A NEW CLAIM IN A RESPONSE TO A PART 18 REQUEST: THE PLEADED CASE REMAINS IMPORTANT
In Costa v DissociaDID Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 1934 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon rejected the defendants’ attempt to argue points that were not pleaded. The only time an issue had been raised was in response to Part 18 requests. This…
APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS “FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS”
In North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group v E (Covid Vaccination) (Rev1) [2022] EWCOP 15 Mr Justice Poole disallowed an application by a respondent in relation to expert evidence. The expert had been instructed without compliance with the procedural rules in…
A COURT ORDER IS A SERIOUS, NOT TRIVIAL, MATTER: A PARTY IN BREACH CANNOT ACT AS IF THE ORDER HAD NEVER BEEN MADE: “THAT SHIP HAS SAILED”.
One of the most imprudent things to do in litigation is to let a court order be made, not comply and then respond by arguing that the order should never have been made anyway. We see an example of this…
NINE YEARS ON IX: 2022: EXPERTS, STRIDENT LANGUAGE AND THE DUTY OWED TO THE COURT
In the final post of this series I have chosen a post from January 2022. There are many common themes on this blog: relief from sanctions; service of the claim form; Part 36; witness statements, among them. However it is…
NINE YEARS ON III: 2015: WITNESS STATEMENTS – WHO SAYS YOU’LL WIN NOTHING WITH KIDS
My, highly personal, selection of posts from each year moves on to 2015. Here we look at a blog post from February 2015 about the decision in Woodland and Maxwell. This is a case that was subject to much interlocutory…
DIRE ISSUES ARISE WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS IN RELATION TO THE JOINT MEETING: FULL TRANSCRIPT NOW AVAILABLE
I have written before about the decision of Senior Master Fontaine in Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Ltd [2022] EWHC 479 (QB) where the claimants permission to rely on an expert witness was withdrawn because of conduct in relation to…
NINE YEARS ON 2: “DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS : THE QUESTIONS YOU ASK WILL DETERMINE THE ANSWERS YOU GET: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE”
I am “reprinting” a post from every year that this blog has been going. Today we have reached 2014. A post on drafting witness statements and the asking of leading questions. This is an ongoing issue. The drastic measures introduced…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: A FAILURE TO FOLLOW THE BASIC RULES IS OFTEN A SIGN OF MORE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEMS…
We are looking at another aspect of the judgment of HHJ Pearce in Pitalia & Anor v NHS Commissioning Board [2022] EWHC 1636_2 (QB). The judge took the time to note that none of the claimant’s witness statements complied with…
THE RULES ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS “SHOULD NOT BE USED AS A WEAPON FOR THE PURPOSE OF BATTERING THE OPPOSITION”: COMMONSENSE MUST BE USED: APPLICANT ORDERED TO PAY 75% OF THE RESPONDENTS’ COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS
In Curtiss & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Anor (Costs) [2022] EWHC 1514 (TCC) HHJ Keyser QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) ordered the applicant to pay 75% the respondents’ costs on the indemnity basis. The…
EXPERT WHO WALKED “ON THE PAVEMENT HAND IN HAND” WITH THE CLIENT: EXPERT WITH ALL THE HALLMARKS OF THE MENTALITY OF AN ADVOCATE
We have already looked at the judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Gallagher v Gallagher (No.2) (Financial Remedies) [2022] EWFC 53 in relation to costs. There are some telling observations in that judgment in relation to the role of the expert…
THE PRACTICE DIRECTION SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS A WEAPON IN WHICH TO FILLET TWO OR THREE WORDS FROM A WITNESS STATEMENT: CLAIMANTS FAIL IN THEIR PITCH TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE
In Lifestyle Equities CV & Anor v Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd & Ors [2022] EWHC 1244 (Ch) Mr Justice Mellor refused the claimants’ application to exclude or edit the defendants’ witness statements. “… in my view PD57AC…
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES LEADS TO PARTS OF A CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT BEING STRUCK OUT: COMPLY WITH THE RULES – OR ELSE
In Primavera Associates Ltd v Hertsmere Borough Council [2022] EWHC 1240 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews, sitting as a judge of the High Court, struck out parts of the claimant’s witness statement due to its failure to comply with the rules. …
WITNESS DEMEANOUR: ARGUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL
Occasionally I will use Twitter to tweet links to previous posts on this blog which may continue to be of interest. I did this recently in relation to a post on witness credibility and demeanour that I wrote in 2018….
“THE LADD -V- MARSHALL CRITERIA ARE CUMULATIVE”: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED BUT APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE REFUSED: APPEAL ON JUDGE’S FINDINGS OF FACT FAILED
In Premier Experts London Ltd -v- Rajwani [2022] EWHC 1188 (QB) Sir Andrew Nicol refused the defendant’s application for permission to appeal. Relief was granted when new evidence was served late, however that evidence failed to satisfy the Ladd -v-…
WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH: “IT IS DOUBTFUL THAT HE IN FACT SIGNED THE STATEMENT”
In Borra v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs & Anor [2022] EWHC 1195 (Ch) ICC Judge Mullen considered the requirements of the Practice Direction in relation to a witness giving evidence in a foreign language. None of the…
PROVING THINGS 233: ASSESSING EVIDENCE AFTER 14 YEARS: THE CRUEL CONCEPT OF CAUSATION IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE
This blog has looked many times at issues relating to witness evidence and the judicial approach when hearing evidence of matters that happened a considerable time before trial. The difficulties are made clear in the judgment of HHJ Emma Kelly…
PROVING THINGS 232: “THE RULES OF THE GAME OF ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL HAVE NOT BEEN DRAFTED WITH CIVIL LIABILITY IN MIND”: APPEAL LEADS TO OVERTURNING OF JUDGMENT ON FOOTBALLER’S NEGLIGENCE: A REMATCH IS ORDERED
In Fulham Football Club v Jones [2022] EWHC 1108 (QB) Mr Justice Lane allowed an appeal in a case where a footballer had found to be negligent when tackling an opponent. The judgment considers the issue of liability in the…
INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT FILE EVIDENCE AND THERE ARE ISSUES WITH DISCLOSURE: A WORKING EXAMPLE
In Sinha v Taylor & Ors [2022] EWHC 1096 (Comm) Mr Simon Colton QC considered the inferences to be drawn when the defendants had not filed witness evidence and there was issues in relation to disclosure. THE CASE The…
PROVING THINGS 231: ASSESSING LOSS OF EARNINGS OF AN ARTIST: THE WIDE PALETTE OF APPROACHES THE COURT CAN TAKE
There are many cases where the courts have had to consider the loss of earnings of a claimant whose career pattern, and thus earnings, are not wholly certain. Often these relate to those working in sports or entertainment. In Mathieu…
PROVING THINGS 230: NEGLIGENCE AND BREACH MUST STILL BE PROVEN WHEN BRINGING CONTRIBUTION PROCEEDINGS
In Percy v White & Anor [2022] EWCA Civ 493 the Court of Appeal overturned a decision based on a contribution notice. This case makes it clear that a party bringing contribution proceedings still has to establish breach and causation…
A DEFENDANT WAS BOUND BY THE TERMS OF AN ORDER AGREED BY THEIR COUNSEL: THE DEAL WAS DONE
In Ashford Borough Council & Anor v Wilson [2022] EWHC 988 (QB) Darryl Allen QC, sitting as a High Court judge, found that a defendant was bound by the terms of an order drawn up with the agreement of their…
COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER STRIKING OUT AN ACTION: A CASE WITH “A NUMBER OF EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES”, NOT LEAST THAT THE DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE WAS UNRELIABLE
In Storey v British Telecommunications Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 616 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order striking out an personal injury action. The court was fairly critical about the evidence that had been placed before it…
RAKING UP OLD CASES WAS NOT A FRUITFUL GROUND FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION OF AN EXPERT
In contemporary litigation it is not unusual for the parties to spend some time (perhaps a considerably time) looking for material about previous cases that expert witnesses were involved in. This may not always be time well spent. In Richards…
STRIKING OUT PART OF A WITNESS STATEMENTS: SOME PART OF THESE HAVE TO GO: HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mrs Justice Steyn in Vardy -v- Rooney & News Group Newspapers Ltd [2022] EWHC 946 (QB) also contains a consideration of an application to strike out part of the witness statement. There is a review of the…
THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND COURT JUDGMENTS: UP AND RUNNING
Court and Tribunal decisions are now freely available from The National Archives. THE PAGE The case law finder can be found here. THE PRESS RELEASE The press release explaining matters can be found here. NOTE THAT BAILII CARRIES ON …
JUDGE GRANTS SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST CLAIMANT IN ACTION AGAINST SOLICITORS AND LEADING COUNSEL
In Coote -v- Ullstein [2022] EWHC 606 (QB) His Honour Judge Gosnell (sitting as a judge of the High Court) granted the defendants’ applications for summary judgment in relation to a professional negligence claim being brought against them. The judge…
PROVING THINGS 229: WHO BEARS THE BURDEN OF PROOF WHEN A CLAIMANT SEEKS DAMAGES GROSS OF TAXATION
We are returning for the second, but not the last, time to the judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mathieu v Hinds & Anor [2022] EWHC 924 (QB). The judge awarded an injured claimant damages for loss of earnings gross of tax. …
PROVING THINGS 228: PLEADING AND PROVING MITIGATION OF LOSS: THE NEED FOR A DEFENDANT TO ESTABLISH A “CONCRETE CASE”
The judgment of Mrs Justice Hill in Mathieu v Hinds & Anor [2022] EWHC 924 (QB) is interesting for a large number of reasons. Here we look at the judgment in relation to pleading and proving mitigation of loss. “A…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND LANGUAGE DIFFICULTIES: JUDGE EXAMINES THE “MINEFIELD” FOR THE LITIGANT
In Bahia v Sidhu & Anor [2022] EWHC 875 (Ch) Mrs Justice Joanna Smith considered the problems that arose when a witness provided a statement in English but was not totally proficient in that language. The decision to provide the…
“IT SHOULD BE UNDERSTOOD THAT DELIBERATE FLOUTING OF ORDERS, GUIDANCE AND PROCEDURE IS A FORM OF FORENSIC CHEATING AND SHOULD BE TREATED AS SUCH”
In Xanthopoulos v Rakshina [2022] EWFC 30 Mr Justice Mostyn considered some key aspects of procedure, including costs and transparency. Here we look at that part of the judgment that deals with compliance with the rules. “This utter disregard…
WHEN A WITNESS GIVES DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS IN DIFFERENT STATEMENTS IT RARELY HELPS THEIR CASE: JUDGE FINDS IT “UNIMPRESSIVE”
In Parry v Johnson & Anor (Rev1) [2022] EWHC 889 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie considered the evidence of the defendant driver in a road traffic case. The defendant’s different accounts on different occasions did not help his cause. The judge…
COURT REFUSES DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION THAT DEFENDANT’S KENYAN WITNESSES SHOULD APPEAR BY VIDEO LINK:
In Jackson v Hayes & Jarvis (Travel) Ltd [2022] EWHC 453 (QB) Mrs Justice Eady refused the defendant’s application that its witnesses give evidence by video link from Kenya. “I am left with, on the one hand, an absence of…
LITIGATION FRIEND GAVE FALSE EVIDENCE AND WAS IN CONTEMPT OF COURT: “GOOD DAYS” DOES NOT EXPLAIN CLAIMANT’S LEADING THEATRICAL ROLES
In Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v Colley [2022] EWHC 854 (QB) Mr Justice Bourne sentenced a litigation friend to six months in prison (suspended for two years) for giving false evidence in support of her daughter’s claim for…
ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: CREDIBILITY IS NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME THING AS HONESTY
Here I want to discuss the issue of witness (and client) credibility. Many cases will turn on credibility and any litigator has to be able to make an assessment of this when taking a case on; before issuing proceedings and…
PART 18 REQUESTS SHOULD NOT BE AUTOMATIC ASPECT OF LITIGATION, NOR SHOULD THEY BE MADE AS A MATTER OF ROUTINE: HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Richard Salter QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) in Al Saud & Anor v Gibbs & Anor [2022] EWHC 706 (Comm) contains a detailed consideration of the rules and case law relating to…
“LEGAL PROCEEDINGS DO NOT EXIST FOR THE PURPOSE OF PERMITTING PARTIES TO PUT IRRELEVANT MATTERS INTO THE PUBLIC DOMAIN”: EVIDENCE ON BEHALF OF THE DUKE OF SUSSEX IS CURTAILED
In The Duke of Sussex, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWHC 682 (Admin) Mr Justice Swift excluded irrelevant material in witness statements and other documents. He also refused the claimant’s request…
TEXTING WHILE DRIVING AND CIVIL LIABILITY: JUDGES KNOW, YOU KNOW: “A CONCLUSION I REACH WITHOUT ENTHUSIASM BUT THE EVIDENCE IS COMPELLING”
In HRA v KGC [2022] EWHC 650 (QB) Mr Justice Turner considered the question of liability. It is an example of a phone record playing a part in the decision that the defendant was negligent. The judge found that the…
PROVING THINGS 227: FAILURE TO PROVE A DEBT CLAIM: “THE PROOF REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE CLAIMANT IS ENTITLED TO THE SUMS WHICH IT CLAIMS IS SADLY LACKING”
The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Emery Planning Partnership Ltd v Bevan [2022] EWHC 494 (QB) illustrates a failure by a claimant to prove a debt claim. It is (yet another) object lesson that facts and evidence are needed…
You must be logged in to post a comment.