EXPERTS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE DUTY OF DISCLOSURE: A REVIEW OF THE RULES AND CASES: HOW EXPERTS CAN AVOID HITTING THE NET
An earlier post looked at the decision of Mr Justice Mostyn in Bux v The General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 762. Part of that judgment dealt with the duties of experts to disclose an interest they have in the case. This…
HOW TO INSTRUCT COUNSEL: USEFUL GUIDES: “DO NOT MAKE YOUR INSTRUCTIONS FLUFFY”
The post yesterday covering a case where counsel’s advice was altered led to some interesting discussions on Twitter. This led to a thread where one lawyer said that they had not been taught how to instruct counsel at any time…
“VARIOUS WITNESSES CAN ALL GIVE HONEST BUT NEVERTHELESS CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF A GIVEN EVENT”: GESTMIN PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENT
In Barrow & Ors v Merret & Anor [2021] EWHC 792 (QB) Richard Hermer QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the guidance given in Gestmin in the context of a road traffic accident. It is a reminder…
WHEN COUNSEL’S ADVICE WAS ALTERED (WITHOUT COUNSEL’S CONSENT): CAVEATS REMOVED BEFORE BEING SHOWN TO INTERESTED PARTIES
Someone reading counsel’s advice would normally assume that they were reading all of it. There is a danger (I have not seen before) of advices being altered before being passed on. In Equitable Law Capital, Re [2021] EWHC 763 (Ch)…
PROVING THINGS 208: IMPACT OF COVID MEANS THAT THE CLAIMANT HAS LOST NOTHING AND DEFENDANT GAIN NOTHING: NO AWARD FOR THE CLAIMANT’S “LOSSES”
The judgment of HHJ Hodge QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Wigan Borough Council v Scullindale Global Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 779 (Ch) has much of interest. The judge’s observation that “one of the particular pleasures of…
WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERT COURTS: GESTMIN PRINCIPLES NOW ENSHRINED IN THE RULES
From the 6th April this year some of the key principles from the judgment in Gestmin SGPS S.A. -v- Credit Suisse [2013] EWCA 3560 (Comm) are effectively enshrined into the rules. Key parts of the Gestmin principles are included in the Appendix to…
WHEN A SOLICITOR SIGNS A STATEMENT OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF A CLIENT: GET THE WORDING RIGHT (AND REMEMBER WHAT IT IS YOU ARE CERTIFYING)
A regular search term that leads people to this blog is “can a solicitor sign a statement of truth on behalf of a client?” The answer is yes, for some documents at least. The lawyer has to remember (i) what…
THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE AND CPR CANNOT BE USED TO OVERRIDE THE REQUIREMENT THAT CASES BE DEALT WITH “JUSTLY”: HIGH COURT DECISION
The judgment of Mr Justice Lane in Ibrahim v London Borough of Haringey & Anor [2021] EWHC 731 shows an unsuccessful attempt to argue that the “overriding objective” justified a preliminary finding made after the court did not hear evidence….
DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS AFTER THE 5th APRIL: THE QUESTIONS YOU ASK WILL DETERMINE THE ANSWERS YOU GET
This blog has looked in detail at the rule changes coming into force early next month. In particular there is a need for the whole process of taking witness statements to be transparent. Lawyers are enjoined not to ask leading…
“POSSIBLE CRIMINAL ACTIONS THAT MAY HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THIS CASE INCLUDE PERJURY, CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD AND CONSPIRACY TO PERVERT THE COURT OF JUSTICE”: THE NON-EXISTENT TRIP TO ILKLEY
The judgment of HH Judge Davis-White QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in The British University in Dubai v Ebrahimi [2021] EWHC 757 (Ch) contains clear findings of fact in relation to three witnesses. Among the matters of interest…
“WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WITNESS STATEMENT AND SUBSTANTIVE SUBMISSIONS”
The title of this piece is a search term that led someone to this blog today. Again it caused me to repeat a point made several years ago on this blog. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS In a…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: KEEPING DRAFTS AND “THE SHREWSBURY 24”: LESSONS FROM PAST MISTAKES
It may seem strange to link the highly important Court of Appeal decision in Warren & Ors v R. [2021] EWCA Crim 413 with modern civil litigation. However this is an important case and there are direct parallels to many…
PROVING THINGS 207: CORPORATE INSOLVENCY AND CORONAVIRUS: A COMPANY STILL HAS TO PROVE SOLVENCY PROBLEMS WERE DUE TO COVID
In PGH Investments Ltd v Ewing [2021] EWHC 533 (Ch) Deputy ICC Judge Passfield considered questions of evidence in relation to the provisions that prevent winding up of a company when it can establish that its financial state is due…
“THIS APPLICATION WAS A SIGNIFICANT ABUSE OF THE PROCEDURES … AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE”: THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT, DUTIES TO THE COURT AND THE HAMID JURISDICTION
In the judgment today in DVP & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 606 (Admin) the Administrative Court exercised considered a case referred to it under the “Hamid” jurisdiction…
EXAGGERATING AND INFLATING CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CLAIM LED TO CLAIMANT BEING SENTENCED TO SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT: “THERE IS NO ROBIN HOOD DEFENCE HERE”
In Calderdale & Huddersfield NHS Foundation Trust v Metcalf [2021] EWHC 611 (QB) Mr Justice Griffiths sentenced a claimant to six months imprisonment following the exaggeration of a claim for damages. “She was, by her contempt of court, effectively stealing…
JUDGE STRIKES OUT CLAIMS OF CLAIMANTS JOINED INTO ACTION AFTER CLAIM FORM WAS ISSUED: WHEN AMENDED PLEADINGS START TO RESEMBLE A RAINBOW
The case of Various Claimants v G4S Plc [2021] EWHC 524 (Ch)is one that bristles with procedural issues. Here we look at one issue – the judge striking out the claimants that were added after issue of the claim form…
HOUSING POSSESSION DUTY DESK: SIMON MULLINGS AND SUE JAMES: “SO MUCH MORE THAN” A PRACTICAL GUIDE
If there is a “front line” of the legal world a large part of it has to be the housing possession duty desk. A lawyer, with no previous knowledge of the case, is called upon to try to save the…
ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WEBINAR 11th MAY 2021
I am co-presenting a webinar with solicitor John McQuater on fundamental dishonesty in personal injury action on the 11th May 2021. HOW TO BOOK Details of how to book are available here. THE WEBINAR This webinar will bring you right…
LAWYERS (AND ALL LITIGANTS) REMEMBER THAT YOU CANNOT WRITE TO THE COURT WITHOUT COPYING IN THE PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION
For the second time in two days I am writing of a case where a party has written to the court unilaterally, without copying in the other parties. It was a matter raised in the judgment of Mr Justice Fordham…
JUDGE REFUSES TO VARY THE TERMS OF ORIGINAL ORDER: DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR RECONSIDERATION DID NOT FLY
In Walton Family Estates Ltd & Ors v GID Services Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 464 (Comm) Andrew Hochhauser QC, sitting as a judge of the High Court, refused a defendant’s application to reconsider the terms of an earlier order. …