WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: YOU ARE DEFINITELY NOT TELLING LIES – BUT I STILL DON’T BELIEVE YOU: CREDIBILITY IS NOT NECESSARILY THE SAME AS HONESTY…
One of the most difficult things to explain to clients and witnesses is that they may well believe they are telling the truth. They may well not be liars. However this does not mean that the court will accept their…
PROVING THINGS 282: THE INJURED CLAIMANT ADDUCED NO EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO…)
Here we look at a Privy Council decision in a personal injury case. The claimant lost at first instance, the defendant having elected to call no evidence. What is interesting about this case is the constant motif in the judgment…
EXPERT WATCH 41: THE COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO OVERTURN A DECISION WHERE THE “WRONG” TYPE OF JOINT EXPERT WAS INSTRUCTED
This is an unusual case where, after the event, a party to the litigation argued that the court had relied on the “wrong” type of expert evidence. An educational psychologist had been instructed as a joint expert whereas what was…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 6: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION: STATISTICAL RISK REDUCTION DOES NOT SATISFY THE BURDEN OF PROOF
Establishing causation is a key element of many clinical negligence cases. Here we have a case where the issue of causation was put in two ways: the “but for” test and alternatively the “indivisible injury” test. The claimant did not…
EXPERT WATCH 40: THE TRIAL JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EVIDENCE OF THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED WITNESS: “THE DUTY OF THE COURT IS TO APPLY THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND TO FIND THE FACTS HAVING REGARD TO ALL THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE…”
This is a case where the judge did not accept the views of a jointly instructed expert as to the authenticity of a document that was central to the case. The expert did not have access to all the relevant…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED AFTER CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: “THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE STRUCK OUT”
Here we look at the “second half” of the decision considered in the previous post. Having rejected the claimant’s submissions that breaches of a peremptory order should be considered under CPR 3.10 the judge then went on to consider the…
THE BREACH OF A PEREMPTORY ORDER IS A SERIOUS MATTER: IT CANNOT SIMPLY BE DEALT WITH UNDER CPR 3.10
Here we look at an interesting, but eventually futile, about the approach the court should take when a party was in breach of a peremptory order. The claimant in breach argued that the court should consider the matter under CPR…
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND RELIABILITY: THE WITNESS WHO USED “SMART GLASSES” TO ASSIST IN GIVING ANSWERS TO CROSS-EXAMINATION
Here we have a case where the judge made clear findings that a witness had been using “smart glasses” when giving answers to cross-examination in court. It is another example of how technology can be mis-used during the trial process…
APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE TRIAL: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED
A party who serves a witness statement late always has problems. A litigant who tries to introduce a new witness on the morning of the trial has major problems. We have such an application here. Unsurprisingly it did not fare…
CAN A DEFENDANT MAKE A PART 36 OFFER THAT ATTEMPTS TO BIND THE CLAIMANT IN RELATION TO MATTERS NOT PLEADED?
Here we have an interesting, and important, point about CPR Part 36. Firstly could a defendant establish that a claimant had not beaten a Part 36 offer when that offer dealt with matters that were not part of the pleaded…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A CLIENT BLAMES THEIR SOLICITOR FOR ISSUES IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT: SOME EXAMPLES CONSIDERED
Occasionally I give in-house presentations on drafting witness statements. I always emphasise the importance of protecting the client from over-enthusiastic drafting by their lawyer to make sure that the witness statement is accurate and compliant. I then ask what steps…
WHEN CAN A JUDGE CHANGE THEIR MIND? THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED: AN “AMBUSH” LEADS TO A POINT BEING RECONSIDERED
Here we look at a case where the judge had given a decision on an issue but, on consideration, decided that their initial view may be wrong. The judgment sets out the relevant case law and principles in some detail….
THE QUESTION OF THE CLAIMANT’S CAPACITY SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN DEALT WITH AS A PRELIMINARY ISSUE: THE COURT SHOULD APPOINT A LITIGATION FRIEND – THIS DOES NOT PREJUDICE THE DEFENDANT’S POSITION
Here we have a case where a defendant appealed against a decision it agreed with. The judge found that the claimant had capacity and did not require a Litigation Friend. However the defendant’s issue was with the very decision to…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: EXHIBITS: A REMINDER OF THE RULES, WHERE THINGS GO WRONG AND HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS
The “exhibiting” of documents to witness statements and affidavits is common. It is surprising how common it is for the exhibit, and the witness statement, to fail to comply with the rules. Here we look at the rules relating to…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS WITH EXPERT EVIDENCE: WEBINAR 20th MARCH 2026: THE EXPERTS REPORT WAS “ALMOST WORSE THAN USELESS…”
We have seen some graphic examples in the past few weeks of a court robustly rejecting expert evidence adduced on behalf of a claimant. This webinar examines why expert evidence is not accepted, limited, or even wholly rejected at trial….
THROWBACK FRIDAY: LITIGATION: WHAT IS AN APPROPRIATE CASE LOAD – AND IS IT IMPORTANT? (MARCH 2016)
Here is a post from a decade ago with an issue that remains just as relevant today. What is an appropriate case load for litigators? How do we find the balance between economic survival and overloading, stress and the major…
EXPERT WATCH 39: WHEN THE HOME SECRETARY DID NOT CHALLENGE EXPERT EVIDENCE SHE CANNOT BE THAT SURPRISED WHEN THE COURT ACCEPTS IT
We are looking at another case where a party failed to challenge expert evidence. The Court of Appeal was clear in its view that if fault lay anywhere it was with the appellant’s failure to challenge the expert evidence that…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE PRINCIPLES IN TUI -V- GRIFFITHS DID NOT IMPACT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF A LAY WITNESS
Here we have an unusual argument where an appellant attempted to use the decision in Tui -v- Griffiths to argue that a tribunal should not have accepted the evidence of a lay witness. The evidence of the witness in question…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EVIDENCE BY VIDEO LINK ALLOWED: IS THERE A GOOD REASON, DOES IT SERVE A LEGITIMATE AIM & IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE?
Here we have an unusual issue in an unusual (but high profile) case. The question was whether a witness could be permitted to give evidence by video link in circumstances where he was unable to attend court, but it was…
MAZUR MATTERS 53: JUDGE REFUSES TO GRANT A SPECIFIC OR GENERAL EXEMPTION TO AN EXPERIENCED LEGAL EXECUTIVE
One of the issues that has followed the Mazur decision arises from the fact that the statute gives the court a power to grant an exemption. Here the judge considered whether the power to grant an exemption should be granted…
PREPARING BUNDLES: A GUIDE FOR LITIGANTS IN PERSON (FAMILY GUIDANCE – BUT MUCH FOR OTHERS TO LEARN…)
We all know that the preparation of bundles can be a tricky job, even for legal professionals. The rules in relation to Bundles in family proceedings changed today. The Office of the President of the Family Division has published guidance…
ACTION STRUCK OUT BECAUSE OF APPLICANT’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH A PEREMPTORY ORDER: (THIS MAY WAKE YOU UP ON A MONDAY MORNING…)
Here we have a case, brought be a professional liquidator, which was struck out because of a failure to comply with a peremptory order as to disclosure. It serves as an object lesson in the need to educate a client…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TOP RIGHT HAND CORNER OF ANY WITNESS STATEMENT OR AFFIDAVIT
Here we are looking at one of the basic rules for witness statements. Curiously it is ignored in about 40 – 50% of the statements I see in practice. Often the oversight is ignored. Some judges take a hard line….
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2026
We have seen a lot of issues over the years in relation to the drafting of witness statements and presentation of witness evidence. There are many cases that illustrate the problems that arise. This webinar aims to head off those…
HOW FAR IS A CIVIL COURT BOUND (IF AT ALL) BY THE CONCLUSIONS IN ANOTHER CIVIL MATTER? THE ISSUE CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
Can a judge take into account findings of fact in a “related” civil action? That is the matter being considered here. The judge had to consider whether factual findings as to the employment status of the petitioner in Employment Tribunal…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE COURT OF APPEAL ON THE CREDIBILITY OF AN EXPERT WHO HAD HIDDEN THE FACT THAT THEY HAD BEEN A COLLEAGUE OF THE DEFENDANT (FEBRUARY 2017)
Here we look at a case where the Court of Appeal addressed the issue of witness credibility head on. An expert giving evidence for the defendant in a clinical negligence case failed to disclose the fact that he and the…
EXPERT WATCH 38: AN EXPERT HAD NOT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BY ACCEPTING LIMITED INSTRUCTIONS: BUT WHEN SHOULD AN EXPERT REFUSE INSTRUCTIONS?
Here we are considering some important observations in relation to the duties of an expert who is given limited instructions. The judge considered whether this involved a breach of the expert’s duty to the court. On the facts of this…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A WITNESS STATEMENT “MADE UP OF SUBMISSIONS OR COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS RATHER THAN EVIDENCE”
There are numerous warnings and strictures about not putting submissions, commentary and opinion in witness statements. More than one observer has commented that these rules are routinely ignored. We have examples of this here. We also have an example of…
COST BITES 359: FAILING TO SIGN CONSENT ORDER LEADS TO £44,000 IN COSTS: “GOING SILENT” IS NOT A CHEAP OPTION…
Just a quick warning here about the costs of not signing a consent order having agreed to so something. It can be expensive. We have a case here where it cost £44,000 when the claimant made an application because the…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 57: A CASE ALLEGING PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE AGAINST A SOLICITOR WAS NOT ADEQUATELY PLEADED
We are looking at the same case as in the earlier post, but from a different angle. The case has some particular pleading points. The claimant pleaded that the solicitor was negligent in not instructing counsel, but did not plead that…
PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS: A SOLICITOR WAS NOT NEGLIGENT IN ADVISING THE CLAIMANT TO SETTLE: NEITHER COUNSEL’S ADVICE NOR AN EXPERT REPORT WERE NECESSARY
Fortunately for the courts and legal system most civil cases settle. Advising on settlement terms carries some risks, and requires a high level of judgment. Some clients will be dissatisfied with the settlement reached and blame the lawyers involved for…
MEMBER NEWS: USEFUL LINKS: REMEMBER TO LOOK AT THE END OF THE POST: A REMINDER OF MEMBER DISCOUNTS
There have been developments on this site that readers should be aware of. Firstly the development of the “useful links” at the end of each post. Secondly the discount codes for webinars taking place over the next few weeks. …
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN WHEN A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE SIGNS THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: A STARK REMINDER
There are major dangers when a lawyer signs a statement of truth on behalf of their client. I had actually planned a post on this issue before seeing the judgment last week which features below.. For many years this site…
MORE DECISIONS ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND “HALLUCINATED” CASES: THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IS FAR FROM HAPPY: LEGAL PROFESSIONALS WHO DELEGATE THEIR WORK REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ITS ACCURACY
As I’ve said before the hallucinated cases just keep on coming. The issues were considered by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) here. There are important points about the need to supervise staff who undertake legal research. It is…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 55: THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM CONTAINED A (SIGNIFICANTLY) FALSE FACT: JUDGE FINDS THAT THIS WAS PRINCIPALLY DUE TO THE FAULT OF “BARRISTER M”
It is rare for a judgment about pleadings to be “gripping” reading. We have such a case here. From the opening lines, to the detailed consideration of how the pleadings went wrong, the narrative is compelling. We even have an…
LIMITATION IN ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE CASES: THE COURT DECLINED TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION UNDER S.33 “THE DELAY HAS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY UNDERMINED THE COGENCY OF THE EVIDENCE ABOUT WHETHER THE ABUSE TOOK PLACE AT ALL”
Here we have a case where the court refused to exercise its discretion under Section 33 of the Limitation Act in relation to allegations of sexual abuse that took place in the 1980s. As the judgment notes this is an…
THE USE OF AI FOR PREPARING COURT DOCUMENTS: READ THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL INTERIM REPORT AND CONSULTATION
The Civil Justice Council has produced an interim report and consultation document on the use of AI for preparing Court documents. This is worthwhile reading. It summarises many of the current issues “Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has enormous potential to be…
PROVING THINGS 281:THE CCC CASE IN THE SUPREME COURT: LOSS OF EARNINGS AND CHILDREN: “THE COURT MUST ASSESS DAMAGES AS BEST IT CAN ON SUCH EVIDENCE AS IS REASONABLY AVAILABLE”
One of the things that the judgment in CCC -v- Sheffield has done is to highlight the issues relating to proving loss of earnings claims in relation to children. Indeed this difficulty in establishing such losses was a major issue…
CASE FAILED BECAUSE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITORS ATTEMPTED TO ISSUE USING THE WRONG METHOD: THE DANGERS OF LEAVING THINGS TO THE LAST MINUTE
There are always profound dangers in leaving the issue of proceedings to the last minute. This case illustrates that danger. The claimants left it to days before the expiry of the limitation period before applying to issue. They used the…
LOST YEARS DAMAGES AND THE CHILD CLAIMANT: JUDGMENT IN THE SUPREME COURT TODAY
The judgment of the Supreme Court today considered whether “lost years” damages should be awarded to a young child. The Court, by a majority, allowed the claimant’s appeal and held that damages should be awarded in these circumstances. This post…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EXPERT EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS (ALLOWED IN PART): ADVOCACY AND ARGUMENT – HAD TO GO
We are looking at a case where the sole issue the court was considering was the question of whether passages in the witness statements provided by the claimant were admissible. Unusually the Competition Appeal Tribunal allowed parts of the statements…
COST BITES 353: VARYING A COSTS BUDGETS (1): THE PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED: WHAT IS MEANT BY “SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS”?
We are taking a detailed look at a judgment that deals with proposals to vary costs budgets. This post will look at the judge’s considerations of the rules, principles and guidance that relates to variation of budgets. Later posts will…
EXPERT WATCH 36: THE JUDGE FINDS THAT EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “LITERALLY UNBELIEVABLE” (AND IT GETS WORSE…) “I MEAN, IT IS DISHONEST, FULL STOP”
We are used to seeing judicial criticism of experts on this site. We have an example here of a claimant’s case coming to grief because the judge did not accept her evidence or the evidence of the two experts called…
PART 36: RECENT CASES, KEY ISSUES AND KEY PROBLEMS CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 26th FEBRUARY 2026
A detailed working knowledge of Part 36 in practice is no longer optional for litigators. Recent decisions show the courts applying the rules with increasing rigour, exposing parties to serious and often unexpected costs consequences. This webinar cuts through…
SERVICE POINTS 27 : EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE CLAIM FORM SET ASIDE: FAILURES IN THE DUTY TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE PLAY A MAJOR PART
We have got to the middle of February and this is (I think) the first case about failures of service of the claim form this year. This case has a history we have seen a lot on this site. The…
WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION (2): CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NICE PEOPLE OF TWITTER:
I am here summarising the Advice given by lawyers on the social media site formerly known as Twitter. In April 2019 I asked lawyers what their advice would be for their colleagues in the profession when things go wrong. Specifically…
PRACTICE DIRECTION AMENDMENTS: 193rd UPDATE: CHANGES TO RULES ABOUT DISCLOSURE IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS: THE COURT CAN ORDER A PARTY TO SEEK INSPECTION FROM “ANY PERSON”
There are several amendments in Practice Directions made in the the most recent update. Here we look at one that is directly related to the rule change we looked at last week. The amendment introduces into the Business and Property…
PROVING THINGS 279: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS ENTITLED TO FIND IMPECUNIOSITY EVEN THOUGH THERE HAD BEEN OMISSIONS IN DISCLOSURE
Credit hire litigation has given rise to a number of reported cases over the years. It gives rise to particular issues of procedure and evidence. In particular the need for a claimant to establish “impecuniosity” in order to justify the…
PART 36: LIABILITY ONLY OFFERS AND THE COURT OF APPEAL: WE DON’T HAVE CLARITY AND CERTAINTY WE DO HAVE CONFUSION AND AMBIGUITY
Those with long memories will recall the confusion and uncertainty that the Court of Appeal caused in Carver v BAA Plc [2008] EWCA Civ 412 when the concept of a “near miss” was introduced in relation to Part 36. A…
EXPERT WATCH 35: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO ADDUCE A SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT AFTER THE TRIAL HAD ENDED
There are many (if not all) working advocates who have thought, after a hearing is over, “I could have said that”. The same may well be true of experts. Here we have an attempt to introduce new material in a…
You must be logged in to post a comment.