THE STRENGTH OF ENGLISH LAW: GUIDANCE WHICH NEEDS TO BE GIVEN AT HOME NOT JUST ABROAD
The Courts and Tribunals service have today produced a short guide – essentially selling the English courts* and the UK Jurisdiction. In essence it is a marketing booklet to persuade foreign litigants to use court in the UK and to…
THE JOB OF THE COURT IN CIVIL CASES: A USEFUL PRIMER: ADJUDICATION, THE BURDEN OF PROOF: THE JUDGE DOES NOT DECIDE WHO HAS THE MORAL HIGH GROUND
In Ball & Ors v Ball & Ors [2017] EWHC 1750 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) set out clearly and succinctly the principles by which the civil courts determine cases. They serve as a…
“MUST” MEANS “MUST”: WHEN CRUCIAL PARTS OF YOUR EVIDENCE AMOUNTS TO NO MORE THAN GOSSIP AND RUMOUR IT CAN BE COSTLY.
I have already written that there are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Lady Justice Thirwall in Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice [2017] EWHC 1040 (QB) (the subsequent judgment on costs is also worth reading and will be covered soon)….
A MATTER OF EVIDENCE AND A MATTER OF FACT: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE ACTION WITH “AN OBVIOUS LACUNA IN THE DEFENDANT’S CASE”
Last year I wrote a series of posts about the seminal case of Whitehouse -v- Jordan. The aim was to point out that the essence of the decision was about findings of fact not legal principle. The House of Lords upheld…
FALSE EMAILS, METADATA AND CPR 32.19: A “PROCESS OF FALSIFICATION AND KNOWINGLY PUTTING FORWARD EVIDENCE THAT IS FALSE”
The case of 44 Wellfit Street Ltd v GMR Services Ltd [2017] EWHC 1841 (Ch) was described by Chris Dale as being “like one a much-expanded version of those old-style Finals questions with kitchen sink thrown in”. The judgment of Chief…
MEMORIES, WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EVIDENCE: A SCIENTIFIC VIEW: WHAT EXPERTS WISH YOU KNEW
I have written before about the issue of memory and witness evidence. I have also written about the work of Dr Julia Shaw on this subject. More guidance can be found in her article in the Scientific American What Experts…
WITNESS STATEMENTS DIRECT: MEMORY, GESTMIN £15 MILLION AND QUITE A LOT OF ALCOHOL: A HEADY BREW
There is a certain appropriateness in one of the last major first-instance judgments of Mr Justice Leggatt being about witness credibility and the Gestmin criteria. In Blue -v- Ashley [2017] EWHC 1928 (Comm) Gestmin figured heavily. Everyone believed they were…
UNDOUBTED FLAWS IN THE WAY WITNESS STATEMENTS WERE DRAFTED: LEADS TO A WASTE OF TIME AND COSTS
There are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Lady Justice Thirwall in Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice [2017] EWHC 1040 (QB, Here I want to concentrate upon the witness statements, in particular the defendant’s witness statements. It is another…
PROTECTING YOURSELF AGAINST A WITNESS THAT BLAMES YOU: A CASE TO POINT
I have written before about the problems that can arise when a witness “turns” on the person who prepared their witness statement. An errant witness will often blame the person who took the statement. This issue can be seen, with…
ERRANT EVIDENCE AND PHYSICAL EVIDENCE THAT GOES MISSING: CLAIMANT’S EXPERTS FEEL THE HEAT
I am returning for the fifth time to the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit Merrell Technology Limited [2017] EWHC 1763 (TCC). We have seen the judge’s views on the witnesses, the claimant’s disclosure and arguments that…
COUNSEL’S OPINION OF NO VALUE AT ALL: (ON THIS OCCASION ANYWAY)
I am returning for the fourth time (and still not the last time) to the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit Merrell Technology Limited [2017] EWHC 1763 (TCC). The parties had exchanged written opinions of leading counsel…
THE DANGERS OF SELECTIVE WITNESS EVIDENCE: WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT WAS “UNSATISFACTORY” AND “SIMPLY NOT RELIABLE”
I am returning for the third time (and not the last time) to the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit Merrell Technology Limited [2017] EWHC 1763 (TCC). We have already looked at the (relatively mild) criticisms of…
DEFICIENCIES IN DISCLOSURE: READING THIS JUDGMENT IS NOT LIKE WATCHING PAINT DRY
A case that concerns the fitting of specialist piping at a paint factory may seem an unlikely starting point for procedural controversy. However I am looking again in the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit…
BUNDLES WERE A DOG’S DINNER: MISSING WITNESSES AND AN EXPERT WITH NO CONCEPT OF HIS DUTY TO THE COURT
The judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Bank of Ireland -v- Watts Group PLC [2017]EWHC 1667 (TCC) exemplifies many of the issues in litigation that are regularly covered in this blog: bundles, missing witnesses and errant experts. In particular…
ABSENT WITNESSES CONSIDERED: REASONS FOR ABSENCE NOT ACCEPTED COMPARED TO CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT NOTICE
In Coreix Ltd -v- Coretx Holdings [2017] EWHC 1695 (IPEC) the trial judge was faced with the approach that should be adopted in relation to witnesses that were not at trial. THE CASE The action was a for breach of trademark…
JUDGES, FACT FINDING AND GRENFELL: THE CRUCIAL QUESTION – IS THIS JUDGE A GOOD FACT FINDER
If you write a blog on civil procedure it is not hard to steer a course away from the issues of the day. However there is one issue of the day that is hard to ignore. The criticisms of the…
EVIDENCE OF PREVIOUS EXPERT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE DISCLOSED: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE REASON FOR THE CHANGE OF EXPERT
In Condor Vilca & ors -v- Xstrata Limited [2017] EWHC 582 (QB) Mr Justice Stuart-Smith rejected an application that a party disclose its previous expert evidence when it needed to change its choice of expert. The reason for the change…
DOCUMENTS, AUTHENTICITY AND ADMISSIONS: A TIMELY REMINDER OF THE PROVISIONS OF CPR 32.19
I said in the previous post that there are several reasons litigators should read the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Jones -v- Oven [2017] EWHC 1647 (Ch). One of those reasons is that it contains…
PROVING THINGS 64 : ABSENCE OF STRONG AND STABLE EVIDENCE LEADS TO DAMAGES AWARD OF £2.00
There are several reasons litigators should read the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Jones -v- Oven [2017] EWHC 1647 (Ch). However this is another case where a claim for damages failed because the…
EXPERTS NOT WELLCOME HERE (NOT YET ANYWAY): PARTIES NEED TO ESTABLISH NEED FOR EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Glaxo Wellcome Uk Limited -v- Sandoz Limited [2017] EWHC 1524 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh refused the defendants’ application to rely on three expert witnesses. The judgment contains interesting observations on the nature of the information that needs to be…
TOO MANY DOCUMENTS SPOIL THE CASE: APPLICATIONS SHOULD BE CONDUCTED PROPORTIONALLY
In Alsaifi -v- Amunwa [2017] EWHC 1443 QB Mr Justice Warby reminded parties of the need for bundles and documents to be relevant and proportional. “I make these points to emphasise the importance of parties to litigation of this kind…
EVIDENCE GIVEN WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT: MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE AND CAUSATION
In the judgment today in Diamond -v- Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 1495 (QB) His Honour Judge Freedman (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that a totally honest witness was not correct in her assessment…
WHEN LIFE MIMICS ART: (OR ART MIMICS LIFE): WIGAPEDIA, LEGAL CHEEK – AND WHO PREPARED YOUR WITNESS STATEMENT?
I recommend that all litigators read Wigapedia’s “Jargon Buster Litigation Edition” in Legal Cheek. As ever Wigapedia is cruel but fair in his definitions – “Brief – a document which very rarely is”. With Wigapedia’s permission I am taking up…
INSTRUCTING EXPERTS: FAILURE TO HAVE CLEAR IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES COMPOUNDS THE PROBLEMS
In Astex Therapeutics Limited -v- Astranzenca AB [2017] EWHC 1442 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold considered lengthy and complex issues in relation to compounds. However even in a case of such complexity the evidence of the experts should have been more…
ABSENT WITNESSES DO NOT LEAD TO ADVERSE INFERENCES: ARGUMENT WOULD LEAD TO NEW “COSTS AND TERROR” IN LITIGATION
In Astex Therapeutics Limited -v- Astranzenca AB [2017] EWHC 1442 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold considered, and robustly dismissed, an argument that the court should draw adverse inferences from absent witnesses. “I find it extraordinary that it can be suggested that…
ADVERSE INFERENCES FROM ABSENT WITNESSES: ANOTHER EXAMPLE IN THE HIGH COURT
In NRC Holding Limited -v- Danilitskiy [2017] EWHC 1431 (Ch) Robin Dicker QC, sitting as a High Court judge, considered the inferences that should be drawn when a key individual did not give evidence. THE CASE The claimant had a…
LIES, DAMN LIES AND LITIGATION: WHY PEOPLE TELL LIES AND WHAT DOES THE JUDGE DO?
Litigation is not always about lies or liars. Often it is about misunderstandings, mistaken recollection and people convincing themselves that they are correct. However in litigation, as in life, people do tell lies. Litigators need to know about lies, and…
PROVING THINGS 63: LAW SOCIETY FAILS TO PROVE IT MAKES A LOSS: “DISAPPOINTING, TO SAY THE LEAST”
The Law Society put forward a budget of £637,000* to defend the action in Socrates Training Limited -v- The Law Society of England and Wales [2017] CAT 10. The Law Society, however suffered from a basic failure to prove one…
PROVING THINGS 62: “TOTALLY UNSATISFACTORY” EVIDENCE AT TRIAL FAILS TO PROVE SPECIAL DAMAGES
I wrote about the judgment in Stewart & Chergui -v- The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2017] EWHC 921 (QB), yesterday. There is no harm in repeating one element of that post in this series. I am repeating it because…
COSTS AT THE END OF THE CASE – WHO IS THE REAL WINNER? (AND MORE ABOUT FAILING TO PROVE DAMAGES)
It is uncertain how much a three week jury trial in the High Court will cost. It is certain that it costs a great deal more than the awards of £5,400 and £5,700 Mrs Justice McGowan awarded to the claimants…
EXPERTS AND EVIDENCE: WHEN THE CASE GETS PIECED TOGETHER ON THE EVE OF THE TRIAL
In the course of a very detailed judgment today in a clinical negligence case Mr Justice Langstaff made some important observations about expert evidence. He observed that late evidence may lead to costs consequences. Given that the whole rationale of…
CLIFF, THE BBC AND PART 18 OF THE CPR: “WE DON’T TALK ANY MORE”
In Sir Cliff Richard OBE -v- The British Broadcasting Corporation [2017] EWHC 1291 (Ch) Mr Justice Mann considered an issue of whether the BBC should answer Part 18 questions. It is unusual for one Part 18 question to be the…
LIES, DAMN LIES AND CAR HIRE QUOTES: COMPUTER RECORDS, AND INTERNAL DOCUMENTS PREFERRED TO WITNESS EVIDENCE
The judgment in Accident Exchange Limited -v- Broom [2017] EWHC 1096 (Admin) shows a deliberate, and concerted, effort to undermine the civil justice process. It also shows the importance of obtaining computer records, and internal documentation when preparing a trial….
TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE IV: HOW PROCEDURAL CHANGES CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE REAL WORLD
This may have been a strange venue to be talking about intellectual property rights and civil procedure. However it arose because Mr Justice Birss was on the panel and he has a background in intellectual property law. HOW CHANGES TO…
TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 3: WITNESS STATEMENTS: LITIGANTS IN PERSON ARE BETTER THAN LAWYERS
I attended the APIL conference because I was asked to talk about “proving things”, that is the basic task of establishing a case by evidence. The fact that this blog has a long-running series on this issue may have played…
A “DEFENCE STRAIGHT OUT OF THE 1970S”: DEFENDANT’S PLEADINGS 40 YEARS OUT OF DATE
Some defences are inadequate. Some are (rightly) struck out. Some do not recognise the essential difference between a non-admission and a denial. A series of denials is, the case law makes clear, an inappropriate and archaic way of proceeding. “Churchill’s…
DUTY OF FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: APPLIES TO APPLICATIONS MADE ON SHORT NOTICE
The “new year resolution” I recommended for litigators this year was to be very careful when making without notice applications. A failure to make full and frank disclosure has proven to be financially and professionally disastrous for some litigants (and…
WHEN THE WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: A RECAP
There has been some discussion on Twitter this morning about the issues that arise when witnesses make statements that are, to all intents and purposes, identical. It provides an opportunity to look at some cases on this issue. They make…
“GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS”: THE ROLE OF VIDEO EVIDENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY AND DAMAGES
In Karapetianas -v- Kent and Sussex Loft Conversions Ltd [2017] EWHC 859 (QB) Mr Jonathan Swift QC considered the appropriate approach to damages when the claimant’s case as to ongoing symptoms was contradicted by video evidence. He found that the…
OPENING LINES OF A JUDGMENT: IT STARTED WITH A TWEET: PAGING DOCTOR FREUD
The opening line of a judgment is often a good guide as to what it to follow. For a few days there has been some, occasionally heated, discussion, as to the best opening lines of a judicial pronouncement. THE TWITTER…
PROVING THINGS 61: MORE ON SOCIAL MEDIA: FACEBOOK ENTRIES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY
Facebook and social media play an increasingly important part in litigation. We have looked at several cases where social media has played a critical part in the assessment of witness credibility. Facebook played a part of the judgment today of…
CIVIL COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS: STILL A MAJOR PROBLEM: PROCEDURAL ERRORS ARE “INEVITABLE”
We have had graphic examples recently of cases where committal proceedings in civil, or family, proceedings have gone badly wrong. In LL -v- Lord Chancellor [2017] EWCA Civ 237, the Court of Appeal held that the procedure adopted…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS, DESTROYED DOCUMENTS AND THE DEFENDANT’S WITNESS WITH NO CREDIBILITY AT ALL
The judgment of Mr Justice Goss in RE -v- Calderdale & Huddersfield Foundation Trust [2017] EWHC 824 (QB) shows some concern about the nature of the evidence adduced by the defendant. Documents had been (inadvertently) destroyed and definitely altered. Witnesses…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED TO DEFENDANT WHO APPEARED BY COUNSEL: A “SURPRISING STATE OF AFFAIRS” PUT RIGHT
There may well be a term for the process by which a number of decisions, which appeared sensible at the time they were made, lead to a ridiculous result. This principle may well apply to what happened in Falmouth House…
PROVING THINGS 60: PUTTING SEAWEED OUT OF THE WINDOW: THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE AND THE JUDGE WHO WAS EVEN-HANDEDLY OFFENSIVE:
The Court of Appeal judgment in McBride -v- UK Insurance Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 144 has been covered widely on the issue of the appropriate rate for car hire charges after an accident. However less widely discussed is the fact that,…
BANKS, WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY: AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT
There are many reasons why lawyers should read the decision in Thomas -v- Triodos Bank NV [2017] EWHC 314 (QB). There is an interesting consideration of the duty of care a bank owes a customer and the Hedley Byrne principles….
JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, INTERRUPTIONS AND HOT TUBBING: JUDICIAL LATITUDE IS NOT UNLIMITED
In Shaw -v- Grouby [2017] EWCA Civ 233 the Court of Appeal made some observations about the dangers of a judge getting too inquisitorial in the course of a trial, particularly in the course of cross-examination. “The judge intervened in…
THE TRIAL JUDGE AND FINDINGS OF FACT: COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT OVERTURN FINDINGS OF TRIAL JUDGE
A disappointed insurer failed in its attempt to overturn findings of a trial judge in Hamid -v- Khalid [2017] EWCA Civ 201. “The task of a trial judge is difficult enough without having to deal expressly with every single piece…
WHEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE “INDEPENDENT” WITNESS IS NOT ACCEPTED: WHEN WE WILL EVER LEARN?
In a case where there are disputed facts a party that has an independent witness usually holds a strong hand. However in Elson -v- Stilgoe [2017] EWCA Civ 193 today the Court of Appeal upheld a decision where the trial…
WHEN PUBLIC OFFICIALS MAKE WITNESS STATEMENTS: FAREPAK REVISITED
There was a post earlier this week where a public official faced contempt of court proceedings that was “false and tended to mislead”, and was acquitted because the statement was “careless” rather than criminal. This provides a good opportunity to…
You must be logged in to post a comment.