“WHY IS IT FAIR FOR ONE PARTY TO FOLLOW THE RULES, BUT THE OTHER PARTY TO IGNORE THEM”: PAINTING THE OTHER PARTY IN PERJORATIVE TERMS WILL NOT ASSIST YOUR CASE
In WC v HC (Financial Remedies Agreements) [2022] EWFC 22 Mr Justice Peel had some stringent criticisms of the way in which a party attempted to bypass the rules on witness statement length. Also he highlighted the futility of making…
“IT IS INAPPROPRIATE FOR JUDGES THESE DAYS TO BE EMAILING ADVOCATES ASKING THEM TO UNDERTAKE TASKS AT THE WEEKEND”: PART OF A JUDGMENT
There is much of interest in the judgment of HHJ Carter in N (A Child) (Termination of children’s guardian) [2022] EWFC B16, a case that may well be of considerable interest to family lawyers. Here I want to concentrate on…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: KNOWING WHERE IT CAN ALL GO WRONG – AND AVOIDING PROBLEMS BEFORE THEY OCCUR:WEBINAR ON EXPERTS AND FOR EXPERTS: 21st MARCH 2022
A number of recent cases have emphasised the importance of those who instruct experts, and experts themselves, being fully aware of the nature and scope of the duties of an expert. This webinar looks at cases where experts have gone…
WITNESS EVIDENCE IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: WEBINAR 22nd MARCH 2022
Over the past few months this blog has covered several cases where clinical negligence cases have been determined, ultimately, on the accuracy of witness recollection. For example the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Watson v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS…
EXPERTS GOING WRONG – AGAIN : THIS TIME IT HAS COST (SOMEONE) £225,000: THE WORK TURNS INTO DUST
It is rare for me to write about judgments from secondary sources. However the judgment of Senior Master Fontaine in Patricia Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Limited [2022] EWHC 479 (QB) is noted in two reliable sources and it is a case…
JUDGE CALLS A FOUL: CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO RELY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT BREACHED THE RULES: IF YOU ARE GOING TO CERTIFY COMPLIANCE WITH A PRACTICE DIRECTION IT MAY HELP TO READ IT BEFOREHAND…
In Greencastle MM LLP v Payne & Ors [2022] EWHC 438 (IPEC) Mr Justice Fancourt was highly critical of the way in which witness statements on behalf of a claimant had been drafted. The statements involved wholesale breaches of the…
WHEN A DEFENDANT FAILS TO PRESERVE DATA ON SURVILLANCE EVIDENCE IT IS IN BREACH AND THE COURT REQUIRES AN EXPLANATION
An earlier post looked at the judgment of HHJ Walden-Smith in Stannard -v- Euro Garages Ltd [2022] EW Misc 3 (CC). There is another aspect of that judgment which is of interest. The defendant were relying on surveillance evidence. However the…
A WITNESS GIVING EVIDENCE WHILST DRIVING A CAR: THEN FROM A CROWDED OFFICE AND THEN WITHOUT MOST OF THE DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: THIS DOES NOT END WELL
There are passages in the judgment of Recorder Douglas Campbell QC in ASR Interiors Ltd v AWS Trading Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 372 (IPEC) which demonstrate a remarkably “relaxed” attitude to giving evidence in court by one of the…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, CPR 32 AND … SPIES: GOVERNMENT MUST GIVE SOURCE OF INFORMATION OR BELIEF
The judgment in HM Attorney General for England And Wales v British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) [2022] EWHC 380 (QB) relates to confidentiality and spies. It also contains some important observations on the information needed, and formal requirements, when a witness…
CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 7th MARCH 2022
The “Proving Things” series on this blog often looks at cases relating to loss of income. Recent cases on this topic are explored in a webinar on the 7th March 2022: Claims for Loss of Earnings: Learning from Recent Cases,…
LITIGATION PRIVILEGE: WHEN DOES IT START? HOW DOES THE COURT DEAL WITH ISSUES ARISING? A HIGH COURT CASE
It is difficult to envisage a more apposite tribunal than Charles Hollander QC when matters relating to documentary evidence are in issue. This makes the reading of the decision in Kyla Shipping Co Ltd & Anor v Freight Trading Ltd…
COURT OF APPEAL ALLOWED APPEAL BECAUSE OF PROCEDURAL UNFAIRNESS: INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD NOT BE SUPPLEMENTED BY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONING: THE RIGHT TO CROSS-EXAMINE IS FUNDAMENTAL TO A FAIR HEARING
In Rea & Ors v Rea [2022] EWCA Civ 195 the Court of Appeal (hearing a 2nd tier appeal) overturned a decision of the trial judge and ordered a re-trial when the appellants had not been given an opportunity to…
NEW RULES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 6th APRIL 2022 (5): THE “PERSON” WHO MAY NOT BE NAMED…
A minor amendment is being made to CPR Part 39. The amendment enables any person not to be named if the court thinks this necessary. The rule is no longer confined to a party or witness. Amendment of Part 39…
WHEN DOES A LITIGANT HAVE CAPACITY? AVOIDING CIRCULAR ARGUMENTS: THE NEED FOR LEGAL ADVICE IS NOT A DETERMINING FACTOR
There is an interesting discussion of capacity to litigate in the judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Richardson-Ruhan v Ruhan & Ors [2021] EWFC 6. It is also worth remarking on the judge’s comments on how the expert’s evidence in…
OH WHY ED SHEERAN CAN’T USE A STAND IN: DISCLOSURE AND THE DUTY TO SEARCH: THE SHAPE OF THINGS
In Sheeran & Ors v Chokri & Ors [2021] EWHC 3553 (Ch) Mr Justice Meade set out some of the duties owed by a litigant in relation to the disclosure process. “… Mr Sheeran’s manager undertook the disclosure exercise on…
SEEKING TO ADDUCE NEW EVIDENCE AFTER THE TRIAL HAS ENDED: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY, A FORMAL APPLICATION IS REQUIRED: OVERIDING OBJECTIVE LEADS TO REFUSAL
In JD Group Ltd, Re [2022] EWHC 202 (Ch) Deputy Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Agnello QC refused an application to adduce new evidence after a trial had ended, and judgment was pending. A formal application was required, Denton principles…
THE USE OF A SECOND REPORT IN THE LOW VALUE ROAD TRAFFIC PROTOCOL: FAILURE TO DISCLOSE FIRST REPORT TO THE DEFENDANT DID NOT LEAD TO MEDICAL EVIDENCE BEING EXCLUDED
I am grateful to barrister Kriti Upadhyay for sending me copies of the judgment of Mrs Justice Foster in Greyson -v- Fuller [2022] EWHC 211 (QB), a copy of which is available here Greyson v Fuller – HC Judgment 3-2-22…
“I FIND THAT THE CLAIM WAS CONSTRUCTED BY THE CLAIMANT’S LAWYERS ON A PREMISE WHICH WAS IRRELEVANT AND WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE OR THE LAW”: WHY MUCH MORE CARE IS NEEDED IN DRAFTING SCHEDULES
We are looking again at the decision in Cojanu v Essex Partnership University NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 197 (QB). This time at the judgment in relation to quantum. The case involved a situation where the claimant’s lawyers presentation of the case…
HIGH COURT JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AT TRIAL: “ALL CITIZENS ARE EQUALLY ENTITLED TO COME BEFORE THE COURTS IN CIVIL CLAIMS”
In Cojanu v Essex Partnership University NHS Trust [2022] EWHC 197 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie overturned a trial judge’s findings of fundamental dishonesty. The fact that a claimant had lied about the cause of his injuries did not impact upon…
PROVING THINGS 225: PROVING THAT A SIGNATURE WAS FORGED: DIVORCE PROCEEDINGS WERE NEVER SERVED
In Randhawa v Randhawa (Divorce: Decree Absolute, Set Aside, Forgery) [2021] EWFC B96 HHJ Moradifar found that a signature on an acknowledgment of service had been forged. Consequently the decree of divorce that followed was set aside. THE CASE The…
WITNESS EVIDENCE IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: CRUCIAL FACTUAL FINDINGS MADE IN FAVOUR OF THE DEFENDANT
It is surprising how many clinical negligence cases rest, ultimately, on findings of fact as to what was said. An example can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Watson v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust…
PROVING THINGS 224: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE IMPORTANCE (& LIMITATIONS) OF THE CLAIMANT’S OWN EVIDENCE
The impairment of someone’s ability to earn their living is always a serious matter. There are a number of approaches that the court can take to the award of damages. Anyone representing a claimant should read McRae -v- Chase International…
THE NEED FOR VARIATION OF THE TONE OF CORRESPONDENCE IN LITIGATION: OUTRAGED OFFENCE AND BEING PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE IS USUALLY OFF KEY
I am grateful to solicitor Richard Harrison for allowing me to reproduce his post on “The importance of tone in litigation”. This blog has looked, many times, at judicial criticism of intemperate correspondence. Richard’s observations here will strike a chord…
DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS, STRIDENT LANGUAGE AND THE PART 35 DUTY OWED TO THE COURT: JUDGE ISSUES REMINDER
The previous post looked at the rejection of allegations of fundamental dishonesty in Palmer v Mantas & Anor [2022] EWHC 90 (QB). That judgment also contains some observations in relation to several of the medical experts called on behalf of the…
PROVING THINGS 222: SPENDING £200,000 IN COSTS OVER 9 INCHES OF LAND: BEYOND THE JUDGE’S COMPREHENSION AS TO HOW THIS GOT SO EXPENSIVE
In Davis & Anor v Winner [2021] EW Misc 23 (CC) the parties between them appear to have spent over £200,000 in costs. This is a dispute over inches of land. It is not surprising that HHJ Mithani QC expressed…
FAILING TO TAKE STEPS IN RELATION TO A VULNERABLE WITNESS RENDERED THE TRIAL UNFAIR: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
In S (Vulnerable Party: Fairness Of Proceedings) [2022] EWCA Civ 8 the Court of Appeal set aside a judgment when the court had not appreciated that a key witness was a vulnerable witness and that steps needed to be taken…
WHEN A PARTY FILES A WITNESS STATEMENT THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES: THERE IS NO GOOD REASON AND THE PARTY IN DEFAULT PAYS A PRICE…
In the judgment today in Prime London Holdings 11 Ltd v Thurloe Lodge Ltd [2022] EWHC 79 (Ch) Mr Nicholas Thompsell (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) considered the appropriate response to a witness statement that failed…
PLEADING OF SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE STRUCK OUT: YOU CAN’T MILK OTHER CASES…
In Peter Sharp & Son (a Firm) v GEA Farm Technologies (UK) Ltd [2022] EWHC 64 (Ch) Deputy Master Raeburn considered issues relating to “similar fact” evidence and made an order preventing a claimant from adducing evidence in relation to other…
PROVING THINGS 221: THE COURT WILL NOT SPECULATE
In Hirst & Anor v Dunbar & Ors [2022] EWHC 41 (TCC) Mr Justice Eyre highlighted the need for a claimant to prove losses, and expenditure, the court will not speculate on items relating to expenditure. “In my judgement…
“EACH OF THE CLAIMANTS’ STATEMENTS TENDED TO TAKE THE FORM OF A STANDARD TEMPLATE”: THE PERILS OF IDENTICAL EVIDENCE
It may say a lot about contemporary litigation that the practice of numerous witnesses producing near identical witness statements is so common that I almost decided not to write about it. The practice was considered by HHJ Judge Hodge QC…
CIVIL EVIDENCE AND THE RULE IN HOLLINGTON -v- HEWTHORN: FACTUAL FINDINGS BY ONE JUDGE CANNOT BIND ANOTHER JUDGE IN DIFFERENT PROCEEDINGS
The judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews in Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2021] EWHC 3440 (Ch) provides enough material for half a dozen seminars on civil evidence. Here we look at one aspect of it, the rule in Hollington -v-…
REVIEW OF THE YEAR (3): SOME FACTS, FIGURES AND INTERESTING QUESTIONS (“ARE PART 36 OFFERS INCLUDED IN THE TRIAL BUNDLE?”)
This year the blog has had 529,639 visitors and 1,349,269 views. 535 posts have been published. The number of posts were not as hectic as last year (770 posts) but 2020 was dominated by guidance on litigating in a Covid…
REVIEW OF 2021 (2): CIVIL LITIGATION CASE OF THE YEAR: MOTHER AND CHILD DO NOT BECOME HOMELESS AFTER SUCCESSFUL APPEAL
In Williams v Nilsson & Anor [2021] EWHC 3184 (Ch) HHJ Richard Williams (sitting as a High Court judge) allowed an appeal in a case relating to ownership of property. There is plenty about procedure and evidence in this case,…
WHEN A CLAIMANT APPEARS AS THEIR OWN EXPERT WITNESS: IT RARELY ENDS WELL
In Tehrani v Hamilton Bonaduz AG & Ors [2021] EWHC 3457 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon considered a case where a claimant appeared as their own expert witness. THE CASE The claimant, a professor, brought an action asserting that the defendant…
COVERT RECORDINGS AND EVIDENCE: AN ISSUE FROM A FAMILY CASE
An issue relating to the covert recording of conversations arose in the decision of Recorder Briggs in Children (Private Law: Covert Recordings: Adjournment of Final Hearing), Re [2021] EWFC B82. A party wanted to rely on a “transcript” of secret…
“A SOLICITOR, NO MATTER HOW EXPERIENCED OR INEXPERIENCED, MUST BE TAKEN TO KNOW THE CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES “(ii): A REMINDER OF THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES
The post yesterday on the case where it was stated that every lawyer is taken to know the Civil Procedure Rules has led to me re-visit the “Back to Basics” series on this blog. The series now has 91 posts*…
WHEN A CLAIMANT RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE TO PROVE LIABILITY: THE (NOT SO) SLIPPERY SLOPE TO FAILURE
I am grateful to barrister Frederick Simpson for sending me his note of a decision where the claimant relied heavily on expert evidence in order to establish their claim. There were weaknesses in the report which contributed to the claimant’s…
WITNESS EVIDENCE, MEMORY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION OF THE PRINCIPLES
We looked yesterday at the judgment of HHJ Tindal in Freeman -v- Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, a copy of which is available here. Freeman v Pennine NHS Judgment 03.12.21(without password) (1) The major part of that judgment contains a detailed…
WITNESSES AND REMOTE HEARINGS: HOW IS IT GOING? IT IS WORTHWHILE AS LONG AS THE TECHNOLOGY WORKS
I am grateful to John De Bono QC for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Tindal in Freeman -v- Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, a copy of which is available here. Freeman v Pennine NHS Judgment 03.12.21(without…
PROVING THINGS 220: ANOTHER CASE WHERE FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ESTABLISHED
In Long v Elegant Resorts Ltd [2021] EWHC 1330 (QB) HHJ Pearce, sitting as a judge of the High Court, did not accept the defendant’s contention that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest. The defendant was relying on a factor…
PROVING THINGS 219: FAILING TO PROVE ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY
In Mathewson v Crump & Anor [2020] EWHC 3167 (QB) Dan Squires QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) did not accept the defendants’ submissions that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in pursuing a personal injury claim. THE…
PRACTICE NOTE FROM SENIOR COSTS JUDGE: DEDUCTIONS FROM DAMAGES: CHILDREN AND PROTECTED PARTIES
The Senior Costs Judge has issued a Note on the procedure to be followed in the Senior Courts Costs office on approval of costs settlements where the claimant is a child or protected party. THE NOTE APPROVAL…
“IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE ORAL ADVOCACY TO REDUCE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS TO LITTLE MORE THAN A SERIES OF REFERENCES THAT A JUDGE CAN THEN LEFT TO FIND ACROSS A VAST BUNDLE”
The closing lines of the judgment of HHJ Pelling QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Libyan Investment Authority v Credit Suisse International & Ors [2021] EWHC 2684 (Comm) highlight many issues in relation to civil advocacy. In particular…
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: THE COURT CONSIDERS WHAT WAS SAID – 17 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT
In HTR v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 3228 (QB) Mr Justice Cotter considered the issue of the reliability of witness evidence when the events being considered occurred 17 years previously. It is an example of the kind…
PRISING LAWYERS AWAY FROM THEIR COMFORT BLANKET WHEN DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR WITNESS STATEMENTS AND PD57AC
In the judgment this morning in Blue Manchester Ltd v Bug-Alu Technic GmbH & Anor [2021] EWHC 3095 (TCC) HHJ Stephen Davies (sitting as a High Court Judge) carried out a detailed consideration of the rules relating to witness statements…
COURT OF APPEAL GUIDANCE ON REDACTION OF DOCUMENTS: OBJECTIONS SHOULD BE MADE WELL AHEAD OF TRIAL
In Promontoria (Oak) Ltd v Emanuel & Ors [2021] EWCA Civ 1682 the Court of Appeal set out some guidance in relation to the approach of the courts when documents are redacted. In particular issues relating to redaction should not…
TIME ESTIMATES: “WILDLY OPTIMISTIC TO THE POINT OF ABSURDITY”: AN UNHAPPY JUDGE
In E v B (Interim Maintenance Inaccurate Time Estimate) [2021] EWFC 90 Recorder Chandler made some observations on the difficulties the courts face when the parties list hearings with inadequate time estimates. These are matters of general interest relating to…
WHEN THE DEFENDANT DESTROYS DOCUMENTS AFTER BEING NOTIFIED OF A CLAIM: A “BOMBSHELL” FOLLOWED BY “RADIO SILENCE”: HIGH COURT DECISION
I am grateful to solicitor Thomas Jervis from Leigh Day for bringing my attention to the judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Ayannuga & Ors v One Shot Products Ltd [2021] EWHC 2930 (QB). The judge was considering the…
WHEN A WITNESS CHANGES A KEY PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE WHILST GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THIS DOES NOT END WELL
In Murphy v Milton Keynes Parks Trust Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 2917 (QB) HHJ Crane considered that (relatively familiar) scenario of a party giving new evidence at the date of the trial. The claimant, it must be emphasised, was…
WHEN YOUR CASE LARGELY RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: MAKE SURE YOUR EXPERT IS NOT VIEWED AS BEING PARTISAN
The judgment of Mrs Justice Moulder today in ECU Group PLC v HSBC Bank PLC & Ors [2021] EWHC 2875 (Comm) contains another example of the dangers of relying on expert evidence. The judge did not accept the evidence of…
You must be logged in to post a comment.