Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Civil evidence » Page 33
WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT "FIRST DRAFT"

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT “FIRST DRAFT”

March 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

If you think “first drafts” of witness statements are not that important it is worthwhile having a look at the judgment of Mrs Justice Whipple in PPX v Aulakh [2019] EWHC 717 (QB). It is also an example of a…

A WITNESS STATEMENT IS NOT A  PLACE TO VENT YOUR SPLEEN: "DEPLORABLE PERSONAL ATTACKS" COULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON COSTS

A WITNESS STATEMENT IS NOT A PLACE TO VENT YOUR SPLEEN: “DEPLORABLE PERSONAL ATTACKS” COULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON COSTS

March 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a short closing remark in Mr Justice Mostyn’s judgment in Rothschild v Charmaine De Souza [2018] EWHC 1855 (Fam) that shows the danger of including personal attacks in witness statements. It is comforting to see how often this type…

BREACH OF REGULATIONS IS IPSO FACTO NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ON s.69 OF THE ERRA

BREACH OF REGULATIONS IS IPSO FACTO NEGLIGENT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT ON s.69 OF THE ERRA

March 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Colm Nugent for sending me a copy of the judgment of HH Gore QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Tonkins -v- Tapp  (7th December 2018).   The judgment deals with the issue of the relevance…

JUDICIAL FOOTNOTES: I'LL GIVE YOU FOOTNOTES : WIFE TRYING TO RUN HUSBAND OVER WITH A VAN IS "ALWAYS A TELLTALE SIGN THAT A COUPLE ARE DRIFTING APART"

JUDICIAL FOOTNOTES: I’LL GIVE YOU FOOTNOTES : WIFE TRYING TO RUN HUSBAND OVER WITH A VAN IS “ALWAYS A TELLTALE SIGN THAT A COUPLE ARE DRIFTING APART”

March 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post on the judgment of  Canadian judge J.W. Quinn. J. led (believe it or not) to a heated – and I hope not entirely serious – discussion between some of hte lawyers on which was the best footnote…

"LEAVE AN UNTRUTHFUL MAN IN THE WITNESS BOX LONG ENOUGH AND HE WILL REVEAL HIMSELF TO THE WORLD": WHEN A WITNESS FALLS..

“LEAVE AN UNTRUTHFUL MAN IN THE WITNESS BOX LONG ENOUGH AND HE WILL REVEAL HIMSELF TO THE WORLD”: WHEN A WITNESS FALLS..

March 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I have lost count of the number of times people have asked me where they can find  that “Canadian” case “you know, the one with the judge”.   It is a case about witness credibility, in a blunt style.  The Hearing Clinic…

SOMETHING FOR THE WEEKEND: THE THIRD POST  THIS WEEK ABOUT THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHEN A SOLICITOR SIGNS A STATEMENT OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF A CLIENT

SOMETHING FOR THE WEEKEND: THE THIRD POST THIS WEEK ABOUT THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHEN A SOLICITOR SIGNS A STATEMENT OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF A CLIENT

March 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Statements of Truth

I am returning, again, to the consequences of the Court of Appeal judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392, “the deliberate or reckless making of a false statement in a document verified by a statement of…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER:  A FURTHER RECAP : WHAT IS YOUR SYSTEM IF THE WITNESS BLAMES YOU?

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER: A FURTHER RECAP : WHAT IS YOUR SYSTEM IF THE WITNESS BLAMES YOU?

March 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This topic follows directly on from  the post yesterday about the significance of the statement of truth. In particular the Court of Appeal’s observation that “the deliberate or reckless making of a false statement in a document verified by a statement…

WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO SIGN A DOCUMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF TRUTH: OR SIGN ONE YOURSELF: BEST READ THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO GO TO JAIL

WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO SIGN A DOCUMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF TRUTH: OR SIGN ONE YOURSELF: BEST READ THIS IF YOU DON’T WANT TO GO TO JAIL

March 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 goes much further than a warning to errant experts. It contains important observations that must be considered  by the entire profession. Particularly those who draft statements, and those…

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE LITIGATOR?  WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU RAISE A RHETORICAL QUESTION ON TWITTER..

WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE LITIGATOR? WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU RAISE A RHETORICAL QUESTION ON TWITTER..

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There was much serious material being discussed at the Legal Futures Civil Litigation Conference yesterday.   As best I could I was tweeting observations from the day. I tweeted the rhetorical question asked by Luke Tucker Harrison “What is the role…

PROVING THINGS 146: NO EVIDENCE AT ALL TO PROVE A LOSS, OR THAT THE DEFENDANT CAUSED ANY "LOSS" (THIS IS BECOMING A FAMILIAR STORY)

PROVING THINGS 146: NO EVIDENCE AT ALL TO PROVE A LOSS, OR THAT THE DEFENDANT CAUSED ANY “LOSS” (THIS IS BECOMING A FAMILIAR STORY)

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

The number of people who are willing to commit to large scale, and expensive, litigation without having the basic evidence to prove their case on damages has proven to be a staple fare for this series.  Another example is the…

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 the Court of Appeal set out clear guidance for courts considering sentencing in  cases relating to reckless contempt on the part of expert witnesses.  A “reckless” statement made…

THE POST OFFICE CASE (AGAIN): STRIKING OUT PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DEFENDANT WITH SUPERNATURAL POWERS

THE POST OFFICE CASE (AGAIN): STRIKING OUT PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DEFENDANT WITH SUPERNATURAL POWERS

March 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

For the third time today I am writing about the case of Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd [2018] EWHC 2698 (QB). However we are now looking at the earlier interlocutory application by the defendant to strike out large parts…

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: WHEN POST OFFICE WITNESSES DO NOT DELIVER

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: WHEN POST OFFICE WITNESSES DO NOT DELIVER

March 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (No 3) [2019] EWHC 606 (QB) is 1122 paragraphs long, following a two week long trial.  There are aspects of this case I will look at again. However, it is interesting…

GIVING NOTICE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO ATTACK AN EXPERT'S CREDIBILITY: ISSUES THAT ARISE WHEN EXPERT'S HAVE PRIOR DEALINGS WITH THE PARTIES

GIVING NOTICE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO ATTACK AN EXPERT’S CREDIBILITY: ISSUES THAT ARISE WHEN EXPERT’S HAVE PRIOR DEALINGS WITH THE PARTIES

March 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Hamad M. Aldrees & Partners v Rotex Europe Ltd [2019] EWHC 574 (TCC)  Sir Antony Edwards-Stuart expressed concern about an attack on the credibility of an expert witness.  In that case there was no evidence to support an assertion that…

PROVING THINGS 145: WHEN EXPERTS ARE OF NO HELP AT ALL: IT IS THE FACTS THAT WON IT

PROVING THINGS 145: WHEN EXPERTS ARE OF NO HELP AT ALL: IT IS THE FACTS THAT WON IT

March 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

I am giving a seminar on “Expert Witnesses and Liability” at the APIL Annual Conference in May.  The judgment of HHJ McKenna (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Al-Iqra & Ors v DSG Retail Ltd [2019] EWHC 429 (QB) gives…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 33: INVALUABLE GUIDANCE ON EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM THE ICCA

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 33: INVALUABLE GUIDANCE ON EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM THE ICCA

March 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Useful links

The Inns of Court College of Advocacy has prepared a very useful guide called “Guidance on the preparation, admission and examination of expert evidence”.  It is free of charge and can be downloaded .   This post is just a summary…

PROVING THINGS 143: THE COURTS DON'T REALLY APPRECIATE  EVIDENCE COMING FROM THE NEWS RATHER THAN THE PARTIES: (SHIPS, I SEE NO SHIPS)

PROVING THINGS 143: THE COURTS DON’T REALLY APPRECIATE EVIDENCE COMING FROM THE NEWS RATHER THAN THE PARTIES: (SHIPS, I SEE NO SHIPS)

March 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In The Channel Tunnel Group Ltd & Anor (t/a “Eurotunnel”) v Secretary of State for Transport [2019] EWHC 419 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser expressed concern that witness statements served by the Secretary of State in a civil action were almost immediately…

PROVING THINGS 142: CLAIMANT HAS TO PROVE SIZE OF HIGHWAY DEFECT: PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE "ALMOST COMPLETELY USELESS"

PROVING THINGS 142: CLAIMANT HAS TO PROVE SIZE OF HIGHWAY DEFECT: PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE “ALMOST COMPLETELY USELESS”

March 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment today in  Walsh v The Council of the Borough of Kirklees [2019] EWHC 492 (QB) contains an important message for anyone involved in highway or “tripper” litigation: the claimant has to have evidence to prove the size of the…

THE DANGERS OF TAKING A ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENT - A RECAP

THE DANGERS OF TAKING A ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENT – A RECAP

February 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

A number of recent posts have looked at difficulties caused the the way in which evidence was collected and witness statements drafted.  The taking of one-sided witness statements led to major difficulties for the party who were attempting to rely…

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)

February 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post looked at the witness evidence of some of the claimants against one of the defendants in the case of Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC).  Here we look at the…

WHEN WITNESSES GO "UP HILL AND DOWN DALE" IN AN ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE: TIME TO LOOK AT THE WAY STATEMENTS ARE PREPARED

WHEN WITNESSES GO “UP HILL AND DOWN DALE” IN AN ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE: TIME TO LOOK AT THE WAY STATEMENTS ARE PREPARED

February 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in  Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC) shows why witness statements should be considered carefully prior to…

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

February 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There was report in the Scottish newspaper The Herald earlier this week about disciplinary proceedings being brought against a doctor who had prepared a “misleading and inaccurate” medical report. In essence the expert reported, as facts, matters that the interviewee…

KEEP YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS SHORT AND TO THE POINT: A SHOT ACROSS THE LITIGANTS' BOWS

KEEP YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS SHORT AND TO THE POINT: A SHOT ACROSS THE LITIGANTS’ BOWS

February 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Azitio Holdings & Ors [2019] EWHC 305 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Baker refused the defendants’ application for an adjournment of a trial date. When doing so he sent a clear message as to the way in…

COURT REFUSED TO ORDER THAT CONTESTED EVIDENCE BE REMOVED FROM EXPERT REPORTS

COURT REFUSED TO ORDER THAT CONTESTED EVIDENCE BE REMOVED FROM EXPERT REPORTS

February 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In A v B [2019] EWHC 275 (Comm) Mrs Justice Moulder refused the defendant’s application to declare inadmissible part of an expert report and a joint expert report.  It was held that the principles in Rogers -v- Hoyle are of general…

"IF EVER THERE WERE A CASE IN WHICH THE COURT SHOULD REFUSE TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF GIVING THE CLAIMANTS ANY FURTHER INDULGENCE,  THIS IS IT"

“IF EVER THERE WERE A CASE IN WHICH THE COURT SHOULD REFUSE TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF GIVING THE CLAIMANTS ANY FURTHER INDULGENCE, THIS IS IT”

February 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The judgment in  Jetly & Anor v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 204 (Admin) sets out a series of surprising events.  Mrs Justice Andrews came down very firmly against granting relief from sanctions. Many of the…

STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN'T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT'S CASE STRUCK OUT

STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN’T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT’S CASE STRUCK OUT

February 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

I am grateful to barrister Toby Bishop   for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Marsh in Bhusate -v- Patel [2018] EWHC 2362 (Ch). Re Bhusate JUDGMENT copy  Toby’s discussion of the substantive issues that arose in the claim can…

VIEWING THE WOOD FROM THE TREES: ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A "CUT OUT AND KEEP" GUIDE

VIEWING THE WOOD FROM THE TREES: ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE

February 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

 The judgment of Teare J in Deripaska and Danilina v Chernukhin case [2019] EWHC 173 (Comm), is (at present) only available via a link on the Serle Court website.  It is useful in that a few paragraphs encapsulate the judicial approach to…

PROVING THINGS 140: SPECULATIVE EVIDENCE NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE A "LOSS OF CHANCE"

PROVING THINGS 140: SPECULATIVE EVIDENCE NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE A “LOSS OF CHANCE”

February 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

In Dymoke v Association for Dance Movement Pyschotherapy UK Ltd [2019] EWHC 94 (QB) Mr Justice Popplewell found that a claimant had not adduced sufficient evidence to prove a “loss of chance” in a claim for damages.  This shows that a…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 29:  EXPERTS AND FACTS: EXPERTS WHO VENTURE ONTO THE JUDGE'S TERRITORY DON'T USUALLY FARE TOO WELL

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 29: EXPERTS AND FACTS: EXPERTS WHO VENTURE ONTO THE JUDGE’S TERRITORY DON’T USUALLY FARE TOO WELL

February 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have seen several cases recently where judges have objected, in clear terms, to an expert trying to find “facts”. That is properly a matter for the trial judge.   It is worthwhile looking at the guidance and cases on this…

LITIGATORS AND THE ART OF PERSUASION: USEFUL GUIDES (1): MUNKMAN ON THE TECHNIQUE OF ADVOCACY

February 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

Every litigator is, involved in the art of persuasion.  Litigation is fundamentally about the art of persuasion.  Persuasion is a litigator’s daily task: in correspondence, on the phone,  with opponents. It is wrong to confine the consideration of this essential skill…

WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE USELESS (AND PROBABLY HARMFUL): A FEW CASES TO ILLUSTRATE A COMMON POINT

WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE USELESS (AND PROBABLY HARMFUL): A FEW CASES TO ILLUSTRATE A COMMON POINT

February 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

For the third (and last) time I am returning to the judgment of HHJ Halliwell in  Currie v Thornley & Anor [2019] EWHC.  172 (Ch).  This time the judge’s observations in relation to witness statements.  Using witness statements to “argue” the case…

THE ABSENCE OF KEY DOCUMENTS CANNOT BE EASILY IGNORED: CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL: JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

THE ABSENCE OF KEY DOCUMENTS CANNOT BE EASILY IGNORED: CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL: JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

February 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (GB) Ltd [2019] EWHC 149 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham overturned a judgment in favour of a defendant. The defendant’s failure to produce key documents, or give any explanation for their not being available,  was a major…

HAVING A COPY OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AVAILABLE AT COURT: IT IS IN THE RULES

HAVING A COPY OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AVAILABLE AT COURT: IT IS IN THE RULES

February 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

One other aspect of the decision in Prosser v British Airways Plc [2018] EW Misc B13 is worth noting.  There was a rare reference to the requirements of CPR 32.13(1). Copy witness statements must be available at  the trial for inspection.  …

PROVING THINGS 139: WHEN THE JUDGE HAS TO DECIDE WHETHER ITS ALL BEEN A BIT OF A CRUSH

PROVING THINGS 139: WHEN THE JUDGE HAS TO DECIDE WHETHER ITS ALL BEEN A BIT OF A CRUSH

February 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

Most  of the cases looked at in this series are decisions in the High Court. However issues of witness credibility and accuracy are a constant issue throughout virtually every layer of court and tribunal. In Prosser v British Airways Plc [2018]…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 28: EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 28: EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS

January 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 27: WAIVING LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE IN A WITNESS STATEMENT

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 27: WAIVING LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE IN A WITNESS STATEMENT

January 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

One matter that all litigators must be aware of is that there is a risk of waiving privilege when mentioning legal advice in a witness statement.  This can (and does) happen even when the statement states, expressly, that the maker…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 26: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 26: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In civil proceedings witnesses are commonly present throughout an entire action. On occasions a request is made that witnesses be excluded.  There is little authority for the proposition that a court can exclude witnesses or guidance as to how the discretion…

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POLICE REPORTS AS EVIDENCE: NO NEGLIGENCE WHEN DRIVER FEARED HE WAS TO BE ASSAULTED: A CASE TO POINT

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POLICE REPORTS AS EVIDENCE: NO NEGLIGENCE WHEN DRIVER FEARED HE WAS TO BE ASSAULTED: A CASE TO POINT

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Mohmed v Barnes & Anor [2019] EWHC 87 (QB) Mr Justice Turner found that a driver had not been negligent when he drove into a pedestrian an attempt to escape an assault. The case is important in relation to an…

UNDERSTANDING LEGAL TERMINOLOGY: USEFUL GUIDANCE: IT DOESN'T ALL RES IPSA LOQUITUR  YOU KNOW

UNDERSTANDING LEGAL TERMINOLOGY: USEFUL GUIDANCE: IT DOESN’T ALL RES IPSA LOQUITUR YOU KNOW

January 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Radio 4 programme “Word of Mouth” had a programme last week on “legal language”: “demystifying the language of the court room”. This led one of the participants, barrister, author and blogger Lucy Reed to write a post “Why do…

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: EX-FOOTBALL CLUB DIRECTORS' EVIDENCE: ITS ALL A LOAD OF COBBLERS

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: EX-FOOTBALL CLUB DIRECTORS’ EVIDENCE: ITS ALL A LOAD OF COBBLERS

January 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked at issues of witness credibility many times.  There is a useful summary in the judgment of HHJ Simon Barker QC in Northampton Borough Council v Cardoza & Ors [2019] EWHC 26 (Ch) contains a review of the…

LITIGATORS KEEP A CAREFUL LOOK OUT: ITS YOUR DUTY TO MONITOR YOUR EXPERT'S CONDUCT (OTHERWISE ITS YOUR CLIENT THAT SUFFERS)

LITIGATORS KEEP A CAREFUL LOOK OUT: ITS YOUR DUTY TO MONITOR YOUR EXPERT’S CONDUCT (OTHERWISE ITS YOUR CLIENT THAT SUFFERS)

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One specific aspect of the judgment in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) that needs emphasising is the duty the case places on a litigant’s lawyers to monitor the conduct of an expert and…

ELECTRONIC BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND THE TRIAL PROCESS: A WARNING FROM THE COURTS:  SORT THIS OUT OR THE COURT WILL GO BACK TO PAPER BUNDLES

ELECTRONIC BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND THE TRIAL PROCESS: A WARNING FROM THE COURTS: SORT THIS OUT OR THE COURT WILL GO BACK TO PAPER BUNDLES

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There is a warning to anyone considering the use of electronic bundles at trial contained in the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Invista Textiles (UK) Ltd & Anor v Botes & Ors [2019] EWHC 58 (Ch). THE CASE The judge…

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT'S APPROACH LEADS TO "SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT'S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT": A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ - NOW

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT’S APPROACH LEADS TO “SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT’S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT”: A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ – NOW

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

The judgment of Mr Justice Males in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) is one of the most robust I have seen in relation to expert evidence. An expert’s failure to properly engage…

PROVING THINGS 138 : A WHOPPER OF AN OMISSION: McDONALD'S FAILS TO PROVE TRADEMARK RIGHTS TO "BIG MAC": ADEQUATE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ON THE MENU

PROVING THINGS 138 : A WHOPPER OF AN OMISSION: McDONALD’S FAILS TO PROVE TRADEMARK RIGHTS TO “BIG MAC”: ADEQUATE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ON THE MENU

January 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to  Yisroel for pointing out the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office in the “Big Mac” case. It is not my usual reading. However  Yisroel  points out that McDonald’s failed because of a basic failure…

EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I usually look at cases in the family courts when there are judgments that may be of some interest to civil litigators.  The judgment  of Mr Justice Keehan in M v Derbyshire County Council & Ors [2018] EWHC 3734 (Fam) …

FATAL ACCIDENTS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th MARCH 2019

FATAL ACCIDENTS: AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th MARCH 2019

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Courses, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

I am presenting a webinar on avoiding the pitfalls in fatal accident claims on the 29th March 2019, 1 – 2 pm. The idea came about from of a number of search terms that led to this blog, including “fatal…

PROVING THINGS 137: PROVING A DEFENCE TO A COUNTERCLAIM: NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE MATTERS - THEN JUDGMENT IS GOING TO BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU

PROVING THINGS 137: PROVING A DEFENCE TO A COUNTERCLAIM: NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE MATTERS – THEN JUDGMENT IS GOING TO BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in UK Dry Risers Ltd v Maher [2019] EWHC 44 (QB) shows the importance of being able to prove a defence to a counterclaim. The claimant succeeded on a claim for £3,690.72, the defendant obtained a judgment for £13,628.00. …

BREXIT AND CIVIL PROCEDURE:  EXPERTS ARE NOT BE CROSS EXAMINED ON FORESEEABILITY OF UK LEAVING THE EU

BREXIT AND CIVIL PROCEDURE: EXPERTS ARE NOT BE CROSS EXAMINED ON FORESEEABILITY OF UK LEAVING THE EU

January 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Brexit, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

This is a far less exciting case than the headline suggests, however it is the first  case I have seen about the impact of Brexit on civil procedure (albeit indirectly). In Canary Wharf (Bp4) T1 Ltd & Ors v European Medicines…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND TRANSLATION: WHY YOU CAN'T RELY ON PD 22 IN RELATION TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND TRANSLATION: WHY YOU CAN’T RELY ON PD 22 IN RELATION TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

January 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the third post on this subject in one day.  Someone responded to the first post on the need to for witness statements to be in the language of the witness by asserting that Practice Direction 22 could be…

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH AND WITNESSES WITH POOR ENGLISH: PRACTICE DIRECTION 22

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH AND WITNESSES WITH POOR ENGLISH: PRACTICE DIRECTION 22

January 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth

The post earlier today about witness statements in a foreign language led (almost immediately) to a telephone enquiry as to what happens when a party cannot read or understand the statement of truth in a statement of case.  The answer…

← Previous 1 … 32 33 34 … 50 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • EXPERT WATCH 69: “THE APPROACH OF BOTH EXPERTS IS WRONG” : WHEN THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN VALUATION OF $170 MILLION… THE JUDGE DOES NOT HAVE TO SIMPLY PICK A SIDE..
  • BOOK REVIEW: “A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO COSTS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR CASES”: MAY HELP FIX GAPS IN ROOFS AND CERTAINLY FILLS A GAP IN THE MARKET…
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “THE RISK OF INDEMNITY COSTS: WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO TELL YOUR CLIENT?” (AUGUST 2014)
  • INSURER’S APPLICATION TO COMMIT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: LITIGATION IS NOT CONDUCTED ON THE BASIS THAT, NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE, A PARTY MAY BE ABLE TO PUT MATTERS RIGHT AT SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE…
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 89: AN APPELLANT CANNOT PURSUE AN UNPLEADED “NEW, NEW CASE”: APPEAL IN CASE AGAINST SOLICITORS WAS “WASTEFUL OF TIME AND RESOURCES”

Top Posts

EXPERT WATCH 68: THE MISUSE OF AI: "CREATE ME AN EXCEPTIONAL EXPERT WITNESS REPORT": SHOW HOW MY CLIENT "IS 0% AT FAULT": THIS WITNESS HAD A FEW PROBLEMS...
THE DANGERS OF SUING A DISSOLVED COMPANY WHICH HAS BEEN RESTORED TO THE REGISTER: COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND TIME BEYOND THE PERIOD OF DISSOLUTION
COST BITES 441: NO ORDER FOR COSTS - EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT WAS SUCCESSFUL: THERE ARE MANY LESSONS TO LEARN HERE...
INSURER'S APPLICATION TO COMMIT STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: LITIGATION IS NOT CONDUCTED ON THE BASIS THAT, NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE, A PARTY MAY BE ABLE TO PUT MATTERS RIGHT AT SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE...
COST BITES 442: AN IMPORTANT POINT TO WATCH WHEN SEEKING TO RECOVER COSTS ON A COUNTERCLAIM

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.