FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIMS: ENSURING EVERYTHING GOES RIGHT: WEBINAR 17th JUNE 2026
Fatal accident litigation is fraught with procedural and evidential pitfalls. This webinar highlights the areas where cases most commonly go wrong and provides practical guidance on how to avoid costly mistakes. It provides a comprehensive series of checklists of the…
MAZUR MATTERS 63: THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: HIGHLIGHTING THE CHANGES AND THE NEW ELEMENTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO LITIGATORS
The SRA have today published updated guidance on Effective Supervision. There are changes and additions to the pre-existing guidance. Some of these are subtle, others are major. We will look at elements of the guidance in detail in later posts. …
WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A WITNESS STATEMENT FOR THEIR CLIENT: THEY MAY BELIEVE IT TO BE TRUE, BUT IT IS A VERY DIFFERENT MATTER TO PROVIDING EVIDENCE FROM SOMEONE WITH DIRECT RELEVANT KNOWLEDGE
This is the second post on witness evidence and the preparation of witness statements today. It is in a very different context to the first. Here we look at a case in the Intellectual Property List where a judge considered…
WHEN A JUDGE DESCRIBES THE WAY IN WHICH A WITNESS STATEMENT WAS DRAFTED AS “ALARMING” IT IS CLEAR THAT THINGS ARE GOING WRONG
Here we have a case where the judge uses the word “alarmingly” to describe the way in which a witness prepared their witness statement. It transpired that only part of the statement was the witnesses’ evidence, the rest had been…
A CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN ANONYMITY ORDER AND THE APPLICATION TO BE HEARD IN PRIVATE WAS REFUSED
This is a case where the principles relating to anonymity orders and private hearings were considered in detail. The claimants applications was largely refused. The only concession being a restriction on disclosure of the claimant’s address. It is important (if…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: WHEN A CLAIMANT FAILED TO PROVE ANY LOSS AND ATTEMPTED TO USE A LAY WITNESS AS AN EXPERT (JUNE 2018):”THERE IS NO ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE OF ANY LOSS”
We have seen recent examples of cases where parties have failed to prove that they have suffered any loss. The attempts by lay witnesses to give “expert” evidence is also a recurrent theme in this blog. Here we go back…
PARTS OF A DEFENCE WERE STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE OF PROCESS: THE DEFENDANT COULD NOT ATTEMPT TO REARGUE FACTUAL ISSUES THAT HAD BEEN DETERMINED BY A TRIBUNAL
Here we have a case where parts of a defence were struck out, in relation to two of the claimants, because of issue estoppel. The defence was trying to re-argue factual issues which had already been determined by a tribunal. …
PROVING THINGS 290: THE DEFENDANT HAS SUFFERED A LOSS BUT HAS NOT BROUGHT ANY EVIDENCE TO COURT TO PROVE IT…
It is wise to remember that a counterclaiming defendant has the same evidential burden in proving loss as a claimant. Here the judge found that claimant in breach of duty – but found that there was insufficient evidence to prove…
“ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW”: SOME RECAPS BEFORE THE START OF A NEW SERIES: SERIES 1 REVIEWED: (AND WHY THIS IS RELEVANT TO EVERY LITIGATOR…)
We have had three series on advocacy on this site. They have all been from the viewpoint of judges. Looking at guidance given by judges throughout the world. The point being that judges are not your clients, but they are…
CIVIL LITIGATION 2026: A TWELVE POINT SURVIVAL GUIDE UPDATED: 12 YEARS ON AND ALL OF THIS IS STILL RELEVANT
In July 2014 I wrote a 12 point “Survival Guide” for litigators. This was a guide to procedural safety following the Court of Appeal on from the decision in Denton. Re-reading this today all the points remain relevant. Today is…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE FAILS TO ESTABLISH THE FACTUAL CASE SET OUT IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM
Here we have an example of another case which rested, more or less totally, on the claimant’s accuracy of recollection. I am grateful to Patrick Limb KC for drawing my attention to the judgment. The claimant (looking back to events…
EXPERT WATCH 50: THE EXPERT SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HIS TRUE OPINIONS EARLIER – NOT WAITED UNTIL CROSS-EXAMINATION
Experts faced with evidence that appears to contradict their earlier views often face a dilemma. In particular they need to consider whether their earlier conclusions remain valid. We have an example here where the judge was critical of the expert’s…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY ESTABLISHED AT TRIAL: IT WAS NOT A SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE TO DISMISS THE CLAIM
The judge in this case had little difficulty in finding the claimant fundamentally dishonest. Further, although the claimant had suffered some injuries, dismissing the claim was did not give rise to “substantial injustice”. “In my judgment the Claimant’s dishonesty was…
EXPERT WATCH 49: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “UNUSUAL” AT AN INTERLOCUTORY HEARING: “THIS MIXTURE OF OF SUBMISSIONS AND OPINION WAS NOT CPR 35 COMPLIANT EXPERT EVIDENCE”
Here we look at part of a judgment that dealt with expert evidence. The Master was clear that a party could not rely on expert evidence without permission. The use of such evidence is “unusual” in an interlocutory application. Further…
COST BITES 399: WHEN THE COSTS OF THE LITIGATION ALMOST ENTIRELY CONSUME THE VALUE OF THE ESTATE BEING SUED:
This is another case that litigators and litigants need to read. An action against an estate led to the net value of the estate being “almost entirely” consumed by costs. During the course of the litigation the (unsuccessful) claimant already…
IF YOU ARE ASKING FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL – MAKE SURE YOU ARE AVAILABLE…: JUDGE SAYS THE PARTIES SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THIS ISSUE
Here we are looking at a short, but important, point in relation to seeking an expedited trial. The parties agreed the need for a speedy trial and agreed the dates. However it turns out that neither of the leading counsel…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW: “AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS” (OH AND “WELL PADDED VANITY” (JUNE 2016
There have been several series on “advocacy – the judge’s view” on this blog. Here we look at the fourth post in the first series. Again we have the problem that the original links no longer work. However this summary…
WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2026
Expert evidence plays a critical and often decisive role in clinical negligence litigation, and the ability to assess such evidence is a core skill for litigators. This webinar examines the legal framework and case law governing the credibility and admissibility…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE OF WITNESS EVIDENCE IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE TRIAL
Much of the discussion in relation to clinical negligence cases is based on expert evidence and the standard of care (and rightly so). However it is important that practitioners do not overlook the vital role played by witness evidence. Those…
DO LAWYERS (AND EXPERTS) LIKE CHECKLISTS THAT ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES? WELL, I MAY HAVE A TREAT FOR YOU TOMOPRROW
Checklists are always a feature of discussions I have with publishers and legal professionals. I have prepared have created a whole series of checklists for lawyers (9 in total) and a series for experts (6), plus a “Judicial Red Flags”…
SERVICE POINTS 45: A SOLICITOR FAILS TO CHECK THE CE FILE AND 5,000 CLAIMS GO UP IN SMOKE: SEVERAL IMPORTANT LESSONS HERE, INCLUDING THE NEED TO MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR RELIEF PROMPTLY…
This case, where judgment was given today, is essential reading for anyone litigating using CE-File. It is also essential to anyone involved in group litigation. This is a case where 5,000 claimants were refused relief from sanctions. That initial difficulty…
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS (THERE IS NO “DEEMED ADMISSION”) PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE “HALLUCINATED” “FICTITIOUS” RULE
This case has two important practical points. Firstly (contrary to the case put forward by the claimant) a failure to respond to a Notice to Admit facts does not give rise to an “implied admission” by the recipient of the…
AN EASY MISTAKE TO MAKE: HOW A CRUCIAL TIME LIMIT FOR APPEALING WAS MISSED: MISLABELLING OF THE FILES: THIS WAS NOT A “MINOR ERROR…”
Here we look at how a simple mistake in the naming of a file led to a potentially disastrous problem when it led to an appeal being out of time. The wrong documents were sent to the court when an…
EXPERT WATCH 48: HOW AN EXPERT WITNESS CAN LOSE CREDIBILITY AT TRIAL (IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE – BUT THE PRINCIPLES ARE UNIVERSAL…)
Some areas of litigation rely heavily on expert evidence. Clinical negligence is often one of those areas. It is always interesting to read judicial views when a matter reaches trial. Here was have a judgment where the judge considered aspects…
THE APIL FATAL ACCIDENTS WEBINAR SERIES 2026: SEVEN WEBINARS TO HELP NEGOTIATE THIS DIFFICULT AREA OF LAW AND PRACTICE
Fatal accident claims are among the most complex and high-stakes cases a lawyer can handle. They are not simply personal injury claims in which the injured person has died. Fatal accident litigation is governed by a distinct legal framework, involves…
WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
There is no shortage of posts on this blog where judges have been critical of expert witnesses (and sometimes those who instruct them). This webinar examines how courts assess and evaluate expert evidence in personal injury litigation, with a particular…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 15: THE STUDENTS LOAN COMPANY MAY BE AN “EMANATION OF THE STATE”: SOME INTERESTING ISSUES HERE: THESE ARE ISSUES OF LAW – NOT ONE ON WHICH A WITNESS CAN EXPRESS AN OPINION OR VIEW…
The Court of Appeal considered some interesting issues in this case. Firstly in relation to the direct applicability of EC directives; secondly in relation to whether a particular body was an emanation of the state. It is not clear how…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 14: CLAIMANT FAILS IN SLIPPING CASE: THERE WAS A “HYPOTHETICAL” RISK OF SLIPPING WHICH THE DEFENDANT DID NOT NEED TO DEAL WITH
We are continuing our review of personal injury cases with another slipping case where the claim failed (don’t worry the imbalance will be addressed in due course). However the reason in this case was simply because the matter that caused…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 13: WHERE THERE IS BLAME THERE IS NOT ALWAYS A CLAIM: THE DEFENDANT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BUT THE CLAIMANT’S ACTION FAILED
Today we will, primarily, be looking at personal injury and clinical negligence issues. Here we look at a case where the claim failed even though the judge found there was a breach of duty. The difficulty for the claimant was…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: TIPS FOR TESTIFYING IN COURT: FROM THE UNITED STATE’S ATTORNEY’S OFFICE (MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA)
Earlier posts have written on the issue of how little guidance there is for those attending courts (civil courts in particular) to give evidence. An earlier post provided useful links. Here we look at the guidance given in one of…
SERVICE POINTS 43: WHY CPR 6.15 IS NOT THE “CAVALRY” COMING OVER THE HILL TO SAVE YOU IF THE CLAIM FORM HAS NOT BEEN SERVED PROPERLY
There must be many anxious litigators who have read the words of CPR 6.15 and happily assumed that their case is saved. On the face of it this rule gives the court a wide power to authorise service by another…
COST BITES 391: TOO MUCH CORRESPONDENCE, GRADE C RATES NOT INCREASED AND “SO CALLED” SKELETON ARGUMENTS, WHICH REPEAT THE CONTENTS OF OVER-LENGTHY WITNESS STATEMENTS
There are some interesting observations in the short judgment on costs in this case. There was too much correspondence, “witness statements” were in reality skeleton arguments, with the contents then repeated in skeleton arguments. Furthermore a “good” Grade C is…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND PREPARING FOR TRIAL: WEBINAR ON 29th MAY 2026: IT MAY BE A WHOLE BUNDLE OF FUN
In Serra -v- Harvey [2024], wasted costs were ordered on an indemnity basis against the claimant’s solicitors because the lateness and condition of the trial bundles. The bundles were described as “haphazard”. This is just one of numerous posts on…
THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE – LANDING SOLICITORS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE AGAIN (AND DON’T BLAME THE AI FOR EVERYTHING – IT ACTUALLY GAVE OUT WARNINGS TO CHECK…)
One day the incorrect use of AI to cite “hallucinated” authorities is going to ruin someone’s career. It may have done so already, there are a number of SRA investigations pending. The example we look at here is highly educational…
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: WEBINAR 26th MAY 2026: NOW WITH ADDED CHECKLISTS
Allegations of undersettlement of personal injury actions are not uncommon. There is an entire industry specialising in looking at solicitor’s files. This webinar aims to help practitioners avoid such assertions and be able to provide clear and robust replies if…
MAZUR MATTERS 62: THE REVISED COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT: SOME SMALL BUT SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS
There is a revised version of the Court of Appeal judgment in Mazur. Some paragraphs were amended slightly (but significantly). These amendments do not appeal to have made their way to the version of the judgment that is publicly available….
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 76: APPLYING FOR PERMISSION TO AMEND THE DAY BEFORE THE COURT OF APPEAL HEARING, WITH NO NOTICE GIVEN: HAVE A GUESS HOW THIS WENT…
There have been quite a few cases about pleading recently. This case is interesting because it makes the point that after a default judgment is entered a claimant is only entitled to have damages assessed on the basis of their…
WEBINARS AVAILABLE ON DEMAND: WITNESS STATEMENTS; MAZUR; INFORMING THE CLIENT ABOUT THE COSTS OF LITIGATION AND PART 36: A HEADY BREW TO LIGHTEN UP ANY LITIGATOR’S DAY…
Four webinars are now available “on demand” from Civil Litigation Brief: PD57AC; Mazur in the Court of Appeal; Informing the Client about the Costs of Litigation; Part 36 recent developments. THE COSTS (The costs are £75.00 plus VAT if you…
A CLAIMANT’S PART 36 OFFER THAT GAVE A 9% DISCOUNT WAS “SOBER AND REALISTIC”: IT WAS NOT UNJUST FOR THE DEFENDANT TO FACE THE NORMAL CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO BEAT IT
Here we have another case where the court considered an argument that it was “unjust” for an unsuccessful defendant to face the normal Part 36 consequences when they had failed to beat a claimant’s Part 36 offer. This judgment shows…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 73: COURT STRIKES OUT CLAIM FOR £2.1 MILLION FOLLOWING McLAREN CATCHING FIRE: THE CASE WAS NOT PROPERLY PARTICULARISED
Here we have a case where the judge considers in considerable detail the principles relating to pleading, the striking out of pleadings, and the possibility of being allowed to amend. None of these favoured the claimant. “It is not sufficient…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WITNESS EVIDENCE, A LATE APPLICATION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES…
Here we have an example of a litigation strategy backfiring. The applicant made a (late) application for summary judgment to be heard on the first day of the trial. The respondents filed evidence in response to the application. Much of…
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF: WEBINAR 26th MAY 2026
This webinar examines claims of under-settlement brought against claimant solicitors, focusing on how courts determine whether professional negligence has occurred in the handling, settlement, or litigation of a case. It explores key case law where negligence was both established and…
AN “OUNCE OF COMMONSENSE” COULD HAVE RESOLVED THIS – AS IT IS THE COURT WILL ALLOW LITIGATION TO CONTINUE IN TWO JURISDICTIONS.
Here we are looking at the observations made in coming to a decision (where neither applicant was successful) more than the actual process itself. The judge felt that the stance of the parties defined commonsense, but commonsense could not…
COST BITES 388: A COMPANY CANNOT CLAIM ITS OWN EMPLOYEE’S TIME AS LEGAL COSTS WHEN IT WAS REPRESENTED ON AN APPEAL
Here we have a reiteration of a long established principle as to costs. A company can only recover legal costs on an assessment, not the costs of being a litigant. Here the appellant sought to recover both. The Costs Judge…
EXPERT WATCH 47: AN EXPERT CANNOT OMIT MATTERS FROM THEIR REPORT ON THE BASIS THAT THEY COULD EXPLAIN THEM WHEN QUESTIONED: “THIS BELIED A FUNDAMENTAL MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE OBLIGATIONS UPON A CPR COMPLIANT REPORT”
Here we have a very short post on a very significant matter. That is the circumstances in which an expert can miss out the limitations of the data in their report on the basis that they could explain this when…
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU “OWN” IT…
We are looking at another case where the judge has expressed major concerns about the use of Artificial Intelligence in the preparation of documents for the court. The situation is now a (depressingly) familiar one where the use of AI…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS IN CLAIMS FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: WEBINAR 19th MAY 2026: USEFUL QUESTIONNAIRES AND CHECKLISTS INCLUDED
Claims for loss of earnings are a critical component of many personal injury and civil litigation cases, yet they are also among the most vulnerable to failure. Poorly evidenced claims, misunderstanding of legal principles, or flawed calculations can lead not…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
When looking at previous posts we are looking for issues that remain relevant today. This case, about the conduct of experts and their interaction with lawyers, remains highly pertinent. The judge held that the breaches were so severe that the…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A USEFUL ENCAPSULATION OF THE COURT’S APPROACH TO DISPUTED WITNESS EVIDENCE: WITNESSES CAN LIE FOR VARIOUS REASONS
This judgment contains a neat summary of the approach that the court takes when it is faced with a case that rests primarily on witness evidence. The judge reviewed the case law and it was very relevant to the task…
SERVICE POINTS 39: ISSUES OVER CORRECT SPANISH ADDRESS DID NOT RENDER SERVICE INVALID
Here we have a case as to service when the claimant was successful. There were issues as to service as to the correct address and the correct means of service in Spain. The claimant adduced evidence from a Spanish lawyer…
You must be logged in to post a comment.