INACCURATE TRANSCRIPTS WERE NOT AUTHENTIC: HIGH COURT DECISION
One reliable element in most litigation is a transcript of a judgment. In Ghassemian v de Beaumont & Anor [2020] EWHC 1642 (Ch) Mr Justice Birss had cause to question the accuracy of a transcript of his own judgment. “The…
COUNSEL’S ADVICE IS NOT EVIDENCE: REALLY, ITS NOT.
There is an interesting consideration of the role of counsel’s advice in the judgment of HHJ Vincent in AZ v BZ (financial remedies appeal) [2020] EWFC 28. In a financial remedies hearing, a judge was wrong to firstly admit, and…
THE EXPERT THAT DOESN’T GIVE HIS SOURCES (EXCEPT WIKIPEDIA): A PRACTICE DEPRECATED BY THE COURT.
In Engie Fabricom (UK) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1626 (TCC) Mrs Justice O’Farrell commented on the practice of one of the experts in the case. Failure to follow the basic guidance given in the…
GOING BACK INTO COURT: MY FIRST EXPERIENCE OF A SOCIALLY DISTANCED TRIAL
Yesterday I had my first experience since “lockdown” of going back into a court building to do a trial. I did a series of tweets about it and they have had some attention. That is why i thought it best…
FAILURE TO FILE A CERTIFICATE FOR THE LITIGATION FRIEND UPON ISSUE: CAN THE COURT REMEDY THE SITUATION: CONSIDERING THE IMPARTIALITY OF THE LITIGATION FRIEND
It is rare for there to be a lengthy judgment in relation to procedural issues about the appointment and the role of the litigation Friend. In Hinduja v Hinduja & Ors [2020] EWHC 1533 (Ch) Mr Justice Falk considered whether…
PROVING THINGS 177: WHEN YOU ARE RELYING ON A MEDICAL EXPERT ON CAUSATION WHO “SHOOTS FROM THE HIP” (IT DOESN’T END WELL)
I have written many times about issues arising from expert witnesses. In clinical negligence cases the role of the expert witness is often paramount. The claimant, in particular, is almost wholly reliant on expert evidence in relation to causation. It…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE TRIAL HELD REMOTELY: AND IT WORKED WELL…
I have highlighted some cases where remote hearings have had difficulties. In Jones v Ministry of Defence [2020] EWHC 1603 (QB) the judgment indicates that the remote hearing in a clinical negligence case worked well. THE CASE The case was…
THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH: CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEFS’ 7th (OR 29th?) BIRTHDAY: FACTS, FIGURES AND HOW IT ALL BEGAN
This week sees the seventh anniversary of Civil Litigation Brief as a blog. That, it appears, is relatively young as a blog, the housing law blog Nearly Legal recently celebrated its 14th anniversary and is well into its truculent teenage…
WHEN THE SKY FALLS IN: WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: WEBINAR 6th AUGUST 2020
I have been writing on this blog for some time now that lawyers should be taught that mistakes happen. We should aim to avoid them but if errors are made they are often rectifiable if dealt with correctly and quickly. …
WEBINARS ON LAW, PROCEDURE AND DAMAGES: READ ALL ABOUT THEM…
Since lockdown has made giving live presentations impossible I have been involved in presenting a number of webinars. This would seem a good time to set them out. Those that have been given earlier this year are still available on…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE, ALLEGATIONS OF MALINGERING AND INDEMNITY COSTS (AGAINST THE DEFENDANT)
I had no sooner finished a webinar about surveillance evidence this afternoon when I received an email and a copy of a case from solicitor Steve Evans.* The judgment of HHJ Yelton (sitting in the High Court) in Kilbey -v-…
THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES 80: THE POSTS SO FAR
The “back to basics” series has been going since April 2018. It has covered a surprising amount of topics. From how to draft an application to “litigation wishful thinking”. Two years on this is a good time to recap on…
CLAIMS FOR MEDICAL EXPENSES, CARE AND WORK AROUND THE HOME: WEBINAR 23rd JULY 2020
On the 23rd July 2020 I am conducting a webinar “Claims for Medical Expenses, Care and Work around the Home”. This webinar looks at damages in relation to medical expenses and care. It covers the whole range of care claims,…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 79: NON-DISCLOSURE OF THE OTHER SIDE’S WITNESS STATEMENT
Today we are looking at CPR 32.12. The rule preventing a party using the other side’s witness statements for purposes other than the action they were served in. THE RULE Use of witness statements for other purposes 32.12 (1) Except…
COVID REPEATS: THE WHOLE SERIES IN ONE PLACE
There are 50 posts in this series. They represent a personal choice of the 3,614 posts on this blog over the past seven years. COVID REPEATS (1): THE (ALMOST) COMPLETE GUIDE FOR ASPIRANT AND NEW LAWYERS – FROM TWITTER COVID…
OPINION EVIDENCE AND DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED AT TRIAL
In Harlow -v- Aspect Contracts Ltd [2020] EWHC 1488 (TCC) Alexander Nissen QC (sitting as a High Court judge) allowed an application preventing the defendant relying on a witness statement that was, in reality, an attempt to give expert evidence. …
COVID REPEATS 49: SIR HENRY BROOKE: A TRIBUTE TO HIS ONLINE PRESENCE
This is the penultimate post in this series. I thought it would be a good time to return to my tribute to Sir Henry Brooke. One reason for this is that the legal world needed him and misses him. After…
TRANSPARENCY PROJECT: REMOTE COURT HEARINGS GUIDANCE NOTE
The Transparency Project have produced a Remote Court Hearings Guidance Note. This is aimed at litigants themselves. Although it is quite specifically aimed at the Family Courts many litigants (and some lawyers) may find this of some assistance. THE…
PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES: LAW, PRACTICE AND THE KEY CASES
On the 17th July 2020 I am presenting a webinar on periodical payments and provisional damages. THE WEBINAR Periodical payments and provisional damages have been a part of the legal landscape for some time now. A knowledge of the…
CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE IN PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: WEBINAR 7th JULY 2020
On the 7th July 2020 I am presenting a webinar on contributory negligence in personal injury actions and clinical negligence cases. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE Contributory negligence is a common feature of personal injury litigation and (sometimes) in clinical negligence cases….
COVID REPEATS 46: IF YOU CAN’T BE BOTHERED TO CONDUCT YOUR CLIENT’S LITIGATION – THEN JUST MAKE IT ALL UP
Of all the many cases that have featured on this blog the judgment in Islamic Investments Company of the Gulf (Bahamas) Ltd -v- Symphony Gems NV & others [2014] EWHC 377 3777 (Comm) is the one that I found hardest to…
COVID REPEATS 43: FAREPAK: “A DOCUMENT CREATED IN THE LANGUAGE OF LAWYERS BY THE LAWYERS”
Today we are revisiting the observations of Mr Justice Smith in the Farepak case farepak-judges-statement. It presents an object lesson in the need for careful preparation of witness evidence and identifying precisely what “evidence” a witness can give. “The…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE PERILS AND THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th JUNE 2020
The problems that experts can cause in cases (often to the side that instructed them) have been extensively catalogued on this blog over the years. On the 29th June I am giving a webinar on the perils and pitfalls of…
COVID REPEATS 41: OFFICE GOSSIP IS NOT EVIDENCE
This week we continue with our look back at cases in relation to witness evidence. This contains another reminder that there is a requirement, a mandatory requirement, that a witness making a witness statement gives the source of their information…
COVID REPEATS 40: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS IS GOING TO END BADLY: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE (& THEN 10 MORE)
This week we are looking at witness statements and the process of gathering witness evidence. In August 2015 I wrote at length about the judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Susan Saunderson & Others -v- Sonae Industria (UK) Ltd [2015] EWCA…
CIVIL PROCEDURE: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – MAY 2020
As we adjust to the problems of the pandemic some of the more conventional issues of litigation have been dealt with extensively this month. Costs ACL Trio of High Court judges issue costs penalties to defendants that refused ADR ACL Claimant not…
![JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: "ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN"](https://i0.wp.com/www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/calculator_count_statistics_1277492.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: “ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN”
Last week the “Covid Repeats” posts on this blog highlighted a few (and just a few) of the cases where judges had been critical of the role of experts, or experts involved in cases has been problematic. That this remains…
COVID REPEATS 39: THE DANGERS OF OBTAINING ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PROBLEM THAT CANNOT BE GARAGED
This week we are looking at past posts and cases on witness statements and witness evidence. This is an area with no shortage of cases to choose from. I have made the point, many times, that witness statements are basically…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT
The previous two posts on this blog have been warning against complacency in relation to the Denton principles. This is the third in that series. In Magee v Willmott [2020] EWHC 1378 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip allowed an appeal in…
WHY YOU NEED TO KNOW THE RULES AND GUIDANCE IN RELATION TO SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE: A WEBINAR
In the judgment discussed earlier today in Tully v Exterion Media (UK) Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1119 (QB), Master McCloud, made some important observations in relation to how the courts deal with surveillance evidence. As a result of that…
LATE WITNESS STATEMENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS NOT GRANTED: A WARNING AGAINST COMPLACENCY
Anyone who has had the pleasure of hearing Professor Dominic Regan lecture will know that he gives a constant warning that the Denton principles have not gone away. In relation to the late service of budgets in particular, but in…
COVID REPEATS 36: DEFENDANT’S EXPERT TOLD TO GET ON HIS BIKE: WHEN A PARTY “WISELY” PLACES NO RELIANCE ON THEIR OWN EXPERT IN CLOSING SUBMISSIONS
Today we are looking again at the judgment of Mrs Justice Cox in Sinclair -v- Joyner [2015] EWHC Civ 1800 (QB). Some important observations about the role of the expert and the conduct of the expert instructed by the defendant…
WITNESS STATEMENTS FULL OF VITRIOL – THIS IS NEVER GOING TO END WELL…
The “Covid Repeats” series next week will revisit some of those (many) cases where judges have found witness statements to be inadequate. The inclusion of unnecessary matters in witness statements is a continuing issue. It can be seen in the…
COVID REPEATS 35: EXPERTS: DECLARATIONS OF TRUTH SIGNED RECKLESSLY
Problems with experts are very similar across all jurisdictions. The case of Pabon, R v [2018] EWCA Crim 420 is an illuminating one. A decision of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division it shows the dangers when an expert does not comply…
EVALUATING EVIDENCE ON APPEAL: THE APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT READILY DISPLACE THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL JUDGE
I am grateful to Christopher Kardahji from Irwin Mitchell solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Lenord -v- First Manchester Limited [2020] EWHC 982 (QB). The judgment contains a detailed analysis of the…
AFFIDAVITS, COMPULSION, EXHIBITS AND THE IMPLIED DUTY NOT TO DISCLOSE TO THIRD PARTIES: HIGH COURT DECISION
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Walker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Deputy Insolvencies and Companies Court Judge Kyriakides in the Official Receiver -v- Skeene & Bowers [2020] EWHC 1252. It concerned the issue of whether…
LIES, DAMN LIES AND LITIGATION: WHY PEOPLE TELL LIES AND WHAT DOES THE JUDGE DO? (A RECAP)
For various reasons issues relating to the credibility of witnesses and “lies” are in the news this week. Litigation is not always about lies or liars. Often it is about misunderstandings, mistaken recollection and people convincing themselves that they are correct….
COVID REPEATS 33: YOU’LL NEVER GET TYRED OF THIS: AN EXPERT REPORT THAT WAS “EXTRAORDINARY IN ITS PRESENTATION AND SHOT THROUGH WITH BREATH TAKING ARROGANCE”:
This is “experts” week for our stroll back through various posts on this blog. In September 2017 barrister Brian McCluggage for sent me a copy of the decision of Her Honour Judge Belcher in Hatfield -v- Drax Power Ltd (18/08/2017) which…
ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A REMINDER OF THE BASIC PRINCIPLES
Today is is a good day to look again at the judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt 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…
COVID REPEATS 32: EXPERTS: SEEING THE WOOD FOR THE TREES: THE EXPERT THAT DIDN’T BOUGH DOWN TO THE RULES…
This week, providing there are no major developments that draw us elsewhere, the repeats are going to be about cases relating to experts. Firstly we go back to 2014 the judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Stagecoach Great Western Trains -v- Hind…
COVID REPEATS 30: THE LYING WITNESS: THE APPROACH OF THE CIVIL COURTS
We are going back to what was the most widely read post on this blog in 2017 and 2018. It is about witnesses telling lies.Mr Justice Smith has observed that “witnesses can regularly lie”. How do lies impact upon the…
COVID REPEATS 29: “THERE IS NO PRIMER FOR SCUTTLERS”: THE JUDGE’S ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE WHERE (HE FOUND) THAT A SHIP WAS SUNK DELIBERATELY
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Teare in Kairos Shipping Ltd -v- The Standard Club Europe Ltd [2016] EWHC 2412 (Admlty) is a comprehensive lesson in thorough fact finding. “There is no primer or guide to…
THE COVERT RECORDING OF AN EXPERT’S EXAMINATION – THE SEQUEL: DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO OBTAIN NEW EXPERT
In October last year I wrote about the case of Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB). The claimant recorded her consultation with the defendant’s medical expert and was given permission to produce these in evidence. That case has…
EXPERTS CAN’T BE ADVOCATES: IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT
There are some interesting observations about the role of the expert made by Judge Asif Malek in Neil Picklessharon Pickles v Revenue & Customs (Whether crediting a directors’ loan account which was freely available for the directors/members to draw upon…
COVID REPEATS 28: GOING BACK TO COLLEGE: THE NEED TO PROVE DAMAGES
Today we are going back to the general theme of a failure to prove damages. One harsh shock for many litigants occurs when they are asked to prove their damages at trial. We have looked several times when a litigant…
PROVING THINGS 176: RELYING ON MEMORY FROM EVENTS A LONG TIME BACK
I am grateful to David Platt QC for sending me a copy of the judgment given today of Geoffrey Tattersall QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Bannister -v- Freemans Public Limited Company [2020] EWHC 1256 (QB). …
COVID REPEATS 26: YOU HAVE TO PROVE YOU HAVE SUFFERED DAMAGES: FOOTBALL CLUB PITCHES THEIR CASE TOO HIGHLY
The next few posts in this series are going to highlight those cases where parties simply failed to prove things at trial (and there are quite a few of these). Today we are looking at the Court of Appeal decision…
JOHNNY DEPP: LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS & THE COURTS: JUDGE CURTAILS THE EVIDENCE THAT CAN BE CALLED
The judgment of Mr Justice Nicol in Depp II v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1237 (QB) is interesting because the judge grants relief from sanctions because of a delay in service of witness statements. More significantly,…
COVID REPEATS 25: COSTS WHEN A CLAIMANT RECEIVES NOMINAL DAMAGES: YOU’VE TURNED DOWN £1.5 MILLION, RECEIVED £2 & NOW HAVE TO FACE THE CONSEQUENCES
Failing to beat a Part 36 offer is always painful. Failing to beat an offer of £1.5 million and receiving £2 is, most probably, even more painful. Here we look at the second part of the case discussed yesterday. In Marathon…
COVID REPEATS 24: THE CLAIMANT THAT CLAIMED £15 MILLION, TURNED DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND RECEIVED £2.00 (YES TWO WHOLE POUNDS)
The “Proving Things” series has been a part of this blog for several years now. Many of the posts highlight those cases (and there does not seem to be any end to them) where a party simply has no evidence…
You must be logged in to post a comment.