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…
WHEN A PUBLIC OFFICIAL SIGNS A “CARELESS” WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS “FALSE AND TENDED TO MISLEAD”: NOT IMPRESSIVE TO SAY THE LEAST
There are many cases that show a surprisingly insouciant approach to accuracy by those who draft, and those who sign, witness statements. This insouciance is even more surprising when the person who has signed the statement is a public official,…
“SOLICITOR FORCING ME TO SIGN AN INCORRECT WITNESS STATEMENT”: A VERY FRIGHTENING SEARCH TERM
It is possible to see some of the search terms that lead people to this blog (I should stress that there are no details of who made the search). One of the search terms yesterday was “solicitor forcing me to…
PROVING THINGS 59: TO GET SPECIAL DAMAGES YOU HAVE TO PLEAD THEM AND PROVE THEM (EVEN IN DEFAMATION CASES)
In Lisle-Mainwaring -v- Associated Newspapers Ltd [2017] EWHC 543 (QB) Judge Parkes QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) declined to award the claimant special damages for financial outlay on the grounds that they were never properly…
PROVING THINGS 58 : FAILURE TO PROVE CAUSATION LEADS TO AWARD OF NOMINAL DAMAGES
For the third time in recent weeks I write about a case where a claimant has spent much time, energy (and no doubt money) in bringing an action but only recovered nominal damages. In Plantation Holdings (FZ) LLC -v- Dubai…
APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF KNOWLEDGE IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE MIB
In Whyatt -v- Powell & the Motor Insurers Bureau [2017] EWHC 484 (QB) Mr Justice Lewis overturned the findings of the trial judge that three claimants had knowledge that a driver was not insured. The judgment considers what inferences a…
EXPERT EVIDENCE AND EXPERT CREDIBILITY: DISCLOSING KNOWLEDGE OF THE PARTIES IS IMPORTANT
In Thefaut -v- Johnson [2017] EWHC 497(QB) Mr Justice Green made some important observations about the need for experts to be candid about their prior knowledge of, and relationships with, the parties to the action. A failure to mention knowledge…
PROVING THINGS 57: LEASE SAID SOONEST MENDED: CLAIM FOR SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGES FAILS (AND GUESS THE REASON)
This series often looks at cases that have floundered at trial – usually because of the absence of basic evidence to prove a litigant’s case. This can be seen again in the judgment of Mr Stephen Furst QC in Car…
TWITTER, LIBEL AND EVIDENCE: THE KATIE HOPKINS JUDGMENT
The judgment of Mr Justice Warby in Monroe -v- Hopkins [2017] EWHC 433 (QB) has already attracted a lot of attention. Here I want to look at the issues relating to the evidence. The case is one of the…
PROVING THINGS 56: A JUDGE WILL NOT SPECULATE WHEN MATTERS COULD HAVE BEEN PROVEN: COUNTERCLAIM FAILS FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE
The judgment of Mr Recorder Douglas Campbell QC in Starbuck -v- Patsystems (UK) Limited [2017] EWHC 397 (IPEC) illustrates issues in relating to recollection and credibility, it is another example of a claim (counterclaim in this case) failing because of…
THE PROCESS OF TAKING A STATEMENT: EXPLORED IN DETAIL IN OPEN COURT
The judgment of Master Bowles in Wilson -v- Lassman [2017] EWHC 85 (Ch) contains a detailed consideration of the way in which witness evidence was obtained. It highlights the importance of having a careful record of the way in which…
WHERE DOES THE TRUTH LIE? GESTMIN IN THE FAMILY COURTS
This blog has looked at the “Gestmin” guidance many times. I am grateful to Lucy Reed for pointing out that it has been considered in the context of family law. In Lachaux -v- Lachaux [2017] EWHC 385 (Fam) Mr Justice…
THE SELF-CONFIDENT WITNESSES THAT CONVINCE THEMSELVES BUT NO-ONE CAN RELY ON
In Bhullar -v- Bhullar [2017] EWHC 407 (Ch) His Honour Judge Stephen Davies had the difficult task of ascertaining the truth in that most fraught and difficult of circumstances: a family that has been in business together and then fallen out….
EXPERT WITNESSES: RARELY TOTALLY IMPARTIAL BUT SOME ARE LESS PARTIAL THAN OTHERS
There is a short passage in the judgment of His Honour Judge Hacon in Edward Lifesciences -v- Boston Scientific 2017] EWHC 405 (Pat) (03 March 2017) that encapsulate the issues surrounding the assessment of expert evidence. “Rarely, if ever, is an…
PROVING THINGS 55: I’LL SAY IT AGAIN: NO EVIDENCE – NO DAMAGES
The judgment of Mrs Justice Jefford in Kingsgate Development Projects Lt -v- Jordan [2017]EWHC 343 (TCC) is (yet) another example of a claimant asserting damages but there being no evidence to prove them. The claimant ended up with a judgment…
COMPOUND INTEREST OR SIMPLE INTEREST? COUNTING THE COPPERS: CLAIMANT’S ARGUMENT MISSES THE NET
In Ipswich Town Football Club Company Limited -v- The Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary [2017] EWHC 375 (QB) Mr Justice Green considered the question of whether a claimant was entitled to compound interest or simple interest. The judge gave that particular…
CHANGES TO THE DISCOUNT RATE: WITHDRAWING PART 36 OFFERS: IMPORTANT FOR CLAIMANTS AND DEFENDANTS
I wrote yesterday of the practical steps that need to be taken by both parties as a result of the changes to the discount rate (that post is on the Zenith PI Blog and is available here). One point that…
EVIDENCE IN PART 8 APPLICATIONS: APPLY IN ADVANCE OR YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ALLOWED TO CALL ANY
It is unusual to call evidence in Part 8 applications. This is made clear in the judgment of HH Walden-Smith in Wokingham Borough Council -v- Scott [2017] EWHC 294 (QB). A party failed to make an application to call oral…
You must be logged in to post a comment.