ATTRITIONAL WARFARE; UNMERITORIOUS POINTS AND UNFOUNDED ALLEGATIONS OF BAD FAITH: SO MUCH (AND MORE) IN ONE JUDGMENT
The judgment today of Mr Justice Edis in Hayden -v- Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust makes for uncomfortable reading on the issue of the general attitude of the lawyers towards the conduct of the litigation. In addition to…
PROVING THINGS 28: MAKE UNWARRANTED PERSONAL ATTACKS AND USE A "MUD-SLINGING" EXPERT: THAT ALWAYS ENDS WELL
The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Scott -v- E.A.R. Sheppard Consulting & Civil Engineering Ltd [2016] 1949 (TCC) contains some surprising observations. It also contains important lessons in relation to “conspiracy” theories in litigation and the role of the…
THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 2: EXPERTS, OH EXPERTS.
This is the second in the series of posts on the judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages. Here we look…
EXPERTS:YOU'RE NOT RIGHT JUST BECAUSE YOU'RE FAMOUS: A DECISION NOT WRITTEN ON THE BACK OF A FAG PACKET
The judgment of Mr Justice Green in British American Tobacco (UK) Limited -v- Secretary of State for Health [2016] EWHC 1169 is 1,000 paragraphs long. It covers many aspects of law and procedure. I want to concentrate upon one issue….
LEARNING HOW TO PROVE THINGS: A BASIC SKILL THAT NEEDS HONING
As part of the occasional series which jogs peoples memories about New Year’s resolutions for 2016 I am revisiting resolution number 6: “learn how to prove things”. A very basic skill in the litigator’s armoury, but one which is barely…
THE INTERCHANGE BETWEEN LAWYERS & EXPERTS: A DIFFICULT ISSUE
In a week where there is a report of an application being made for a doctor to be committed for contempt* it is prudent to consider that difficult issue of the relationship between the lawyers in a case and the…
THE MEDICAL EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF AN APPLICATION TO ADJOURN CANNOT BE IGNORED
A post last week noted the decision of the Court of Appeal in TBO Investments Ltd -v- Mohun Smith EWCA Civ 403 where the court stated that an application under CPR 39.3 should have been allowed when a defendant failed…
PROVING THINGS 15: DAMAGES & EVIDENCE: GOING BACK TO COLLEGE
One harsh shock for many litigants occurs when they are asked to prove their damages at trial. We have looked several times when a litigant has come to grief at this stage, largely because there is no evidential support for…
EXPERT REPORTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: PART 35 APPLIES
In the judgment today in Khaled -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 857 (Admin) Mr Justice Garnham considered Part 35 of the CPR and the admissibility of expert reports in proceedings in the Administrative Court. “The…
IS THIS AN EXPERT REPORT I SEE BEFORE ME? I THINK NOT
In Al Nehayan -v- Kent [2016] EWHC 623 (QB) Mrs Justice Nicola Davies made observations upon “expert” evidence that had been placed before the court. There were major failures of form as well as of substance. The judgment contains an…
DISCLOSURE AND PREDICTIVE CODING: PYHRRO EXPLAINED FOR THE TYRO
There has been much written already in relation to the decision of Master Matthews in Pyrrho Investments Ltd -v- MWB Property Ltd [2016] EWHC 256 (Ch) [see the links below]. However I want to concentrate upon the fact that this…
PROVING THINGS 9: THE ROLE OF EXPERTS
Here I want to pick up on a few observations of Mr Justice Snowden in Grant -v-Ralls [2016] EWHC 243 (Ch) a case we looked at yesterday. That is the role of the experts. It is dangerous to defer the “proving”…
PROVING THINGS 8: DEFENDANT MUST PROVE THAT FAILURE TO WEAR A SEATBELT MADE A DIFFERENCE
The defendant bears the burden not only of proving contributory negligence but also establishing its causative relevance. The law in Syred -v- Powszecnny Zaklad Ubezpieczen (PZU) SA [2016] EWHC 254 (QB) (Mr Justice Soole) was complex, however one key point…
THE ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS IN LITIGATION: SUPREME COURT GUIDANCE
In Kennedy -v- Cordia Services LLP [2016] UKSC 6 the Supreme Court made some telling observations relating to expert evidence. This was in the context of a Scottish case, however the observations are of general importance. THE CASE The Supreme Court…
PROVING THINGS 5: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND FAILING ON CAUSATION
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Abdel-Khalek -v- Qazi Ali [2016] EWCA Civ 80 demonstrates both the difficulties of compounding lay and “expert” evidence and how a case can fail on causation. KEY POINTS The burden was on…
EVIDENCE, DAMAGES AND A SOLICITOR'S GOODWILL
The Court of Appeal decision in Karim -v- Wemyss [2016] EWCA Civ 27 has already received some publicity, involving as it does litigation following the sale of a solicitor’s practice. However the decision also shows the dangers of not bringing…
COSTS AFTER A SPLIT TRIAL: PART 36; UNNECESSARY EXPERT REPORTS; PROPORTIONALITY AND USELESS BUNDLES: ALL LITIGATION LIFE IS HERE
The short judgment of Mr Justice Males in C&S Associates UK Limited -v- Enterprise Insurance Company PLC [2016] EWHC 67 (Comm) encapsulates many of the problems of contemporary litigation. “It is important that those litigating in this court are aware…
PERMISSION NOT GRANTED TO CALL EMPLOYMENT EXPERTS: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED
In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine [2016] EWHC 45 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone and Master Leslie considered the rules and case law in relation to the need to call expert witnesses in detail. KEY POINTS The claimants were refused…
TEN NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS FOR LITIGATORS IN 2016
Some resolutions to keep you prosperous and out of difficulties in 2016. (Happy New Year) 1. NEVER, EVER, GUESS ABOUT A LIMITATION PERIOD (OR TAKE A CLIENT’S WORD FOR IT) Litigators of all types must have a clear idea about…
CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2015: POETRY, CARPET BOMBING AND DISAPPEARING EXPERTS
We civil litigators cannot be left out of the, apparently universal, need for an annual review. The annual review last year was headed with the words “prolixity”, “sanctions” and creative writing. Here we look at poetry, carpet bombing and disappearing…
SOME WITNESSES MAY NOT BE GOOD HISTORIANS BUT GOOD HISTORIANS CANNOT BE WITNESSES
In Kimathi -v- Foreign & Commonwealth Office [2015]EWHC 3432 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart considered a number of issues relating to witness statements. Here we consider whether the evidence of historians is admissible. Other aspects of this case will be examined…
THAT DIFFICULT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN EXPERT WITNESS AND AN ADVOCATE
In AAW -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKUT 673 (IAT) Upper Tribunal Judge Southern made some telling observations on the role of an expert. The judgment is of general interest in relation to the role…
IS AN EXPERT REALLY NECESSARY? TWO RECENT CASES
The determination of the courts to restrict the use of expert evidence can be seen by the fact that the text of CPR 35.1 appears under the heading “duty to restrict expert evidence”. The rule itself states “Expert evidence shall be…
WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO DISCLOSE THAT THEY KNOW THE PARTIES
A recent high profile criminal case has identified the major problems that can arise when an expert called to give evidence has failed to disclose that they have had previous dealings with the parties. Here we look at how the…
LATE EXPERT EVIDENCE, DENTON AND WAVING A FINGER IN THE AIR
The decision of the Court of Appeal in O’Connor -v- The Pennine Hospitals NHS Trust [2015] EWCA 1244 will receive much attention for the important observations made as to evidence, proof and “res ipsa loquitur”. However here I want…
WHEN THE CREDIBILITY OF THE LAY AND EXPERT WITNESSES LIES IN SHREDS
The previous post in relation to Part 36 led me to examine the substantive judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Van Oord UK Limited -v- Allseas UK Limited [2015] EWHC 3074 (TCC). It contains as damning an assessment of witness…
COMMENT POSING AS CROSS-EXAMINATION: "INAPPROPRIATE AND IMPROPER"
When does cross-examination turn to comment? That is a question all working advocates have to consider, both in relation to their own cross-examination of witnesses, and responding to their opponents. There are some important observations by Mr Justice McCloskey in…
DEFENDANT NOT ALLOWED TO WITHDRAW FROM ADMISSION AND DEBARRED FROM RELYING ON FURTHER EVIDENCE: PLEADINGS ARE STILL IMPORTANT
In Clark -v- Braintree Clinical Services Limited [2015] EWHC 3181 HH Judge Burrell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a defendant’s application to resile from an admission. He also granted the claimant’s application to debar the defendant from…
WITNESS EVIDENCE & THE BURDEN OF PROOF: A CIVIL TRIAL IS NOT A SEARCH FOR THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH: FOOTBALLERS ON TRIAL
Anyone looking for a detailed consideration of the law relating to witness evidence and the burden of proof can find it in the judgment of His Honour Judge Butler (sitting as a High Court judge) in GB -v- Stoke City…
THE EXPERT WITNESS THAT TELLS THE JUDGE THE "FACTS": A REVIEW OF RECENT CASES
There have been a number of recent cases where judges have considered the effect of expert witnesses commenting on primary facts. The judiciary have traditionally, and rightly, guarded their role as primary fact finder. However this does not appear to…
GUIDANCE TO EXPERTS: CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL: WHO DOES AN EXPERT "REPRESENT"?
It is rare that lawyers can look to the British Dental Journal for advice on procedure and evidence. However there is a beautifully phrased letter in the British Dental Journal “reviewing a review”. THE LETTER The writer was commenting on…
CASE MANAGEMENT, NECESSITY AND EXPERTS: BA -v- SPENCER: IS EXPERT EVIDENCE "REASONABLY REQUIRED"?
In his decision today in British Airways Plc -v- Spencer [2015] EWHC 2477 (Ch) Mr Justice Warren made important observations about the need for expert evidence. The judge overturned a case management decision that expert evidence was not necessary and…
ASSESSING EXPERT EVIDENCE: GUIDANCE FROM VICTORIA
There are many cases where a judge has to determine differences between experts. It is helpful for practitioners to know what factors are taken into account when assessing evidence . The Judicial College of Victoria puts all its guidance to…
EXPERT WITNESSES IN INSURANCE CASES 1: INVOLNERT MANAGEMENT
In Involnert Management Inc -v- AIS Insurance Services Limited [2015] EWHC 2225 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt considered the evidence of experts in a case between insurer and insured and, more particularly,between the insured and insurance broker. THE CASE The defendants…
THE CHIPS ARE DOWN FOR EXPERT WHO FAILED TO DECLARE AN INTEREST
In The Ritz Hotel Casino Ltd -v- Al Geabury [2015] EWHC 2294(QB) Mrs Justice Simler DBE was critical of an expert who failed to declare an interest in a case. The expert had become a treating doctor. “It was no…
COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST "EXPERT WITNESSES" ARE NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
The decision of the Divisional Court in Accident Exchange Ltd -v- Nathan John George-Broom & Ors [2015] EWHC 2205 (Admin) is certainly a development in the practice relating to dismissal. THE CASE The claimants applied to commit a number of…
A TRIAL WITHOUT WITNESSES: THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES: DUNNAGE -v- RANDALL
The Court of Appeal decision today in Dunnage -v- Randall [2015] EWCA Civ 673 is one of those seminal cases that every tort law student will have to read. Here we look at the case and the procedure. In particular…
APPEAL COURT CAN DECIDE ISSUES BETWEEN EXPERTS ON FOREIGN LAW: AND ANOTHER LOOK AT WITNESS STATEMENTS
The issue of when an appeal can court take its own view on expert evidence was considered in Group Seven Limited -v- Allied Investment Corporation Limited [2015] EWCA Civ 631. The judgment at first instance also makes for informative reading…
ANOTHER UNSATISFACTORY EXPERT: WITH A WRONG VIEW OF HIS ROLE
In Sinclair -v- Joyner [2015] EWHC Civ 1800 (QB) Mrs Justice Cox made some important observations about the role of the expert and the conduct of the expert instructed by the defendant in that case. THE CASE The claimant was…
CAUSATION AND EVIDENCE – A BURNING PROBLEM? IMPORTANT ISSUES FROM A BIZARRE SET OF FACTS
In Graves -v- Brouwer [2015] EWCA Civ 595 the Court of Appeal carried out an extensive review of the principles and authorities relating to evidence and causation. There is a useful discussion on the role and questioning of experts at…
EXPERT REPORTS: TOO LONG AND NOT MUCH USE: CARE EXPERTS MUST TAKE MORE CARE
In the case of Harman -v- East Kent Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 1662 (QB) Mr Justice Turner had some very clear criticisms of the expert reports. Some of the comments are of general importance. “Against the background of…
THE MEETING OF EXPERTS: CASE LAW AND GUIDANCE
The case of Cintas Corp No 2 -v- Rhino Developments (2015 Ch D Newey J 10/6/2015) * reported on Lawtel today provides an interesting scenario in relation to the conduct of an expert and joint meetings. There is relatively little…
APPEALING DECISIONS IN RELATION TO EXPERTS: SOME USEFUL EXAMPLES
An earlier post commented on how rare it was for appeals to take place in relation to the instruction of experts. John McQuater of Atherton Godfrey has kindly sent me two examples of appeals on the issue of experts. (Both…
PERMISSION TO CALL EXPERT WITNESS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL
I cannot recall the last time an appeal took place in relation to the question of permission to call an expert witness. The post yesterday discussed a case where permission to call an expert was upheld. Hot on its heels…
APPEALS AGAINST DECISION TO ALLOW EXPERT EVIDENCE: DEFENDANTS TOLD TO GET ON THEIR BIKE
Appeals against orders granting permission for parties to call expert witnesses are rare. It is worthwhile, therefore, reading the judgment of Mr Justice Green in Allen -v- Cornwall Council [2015] EWCA Civ 1461 (QB) with some care. THE CASE The…
COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ORDER STRIKING OUT CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO SERVE EXPERT REPORT: DON'T PARK THE LORRY WHEN THE TIDE IS AGAINST YOU
In Elliott -v- Stobart Group Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 449 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out an application for damages because of a failure to serve a medical report. “In my judgment Judge Platts was correct…
INTERIM PAYMENTS; SERIOUS INJURY; ACCOMMODATION AND EELES
The very first post on this blog was a review of the law relating to interim payments in personal injury cases after Eeles. This issue was raised against in the decision of Grainger -v- Cooper [2015] EWHC 1132 (QB). THE…
COSTS OF EXPERTS AND GOING OUTSIDE THE COSTS BUDGET: THE HIGH COURT REFUSES TO EXTEND BUDGETED ITEMS AFTER A TRIAL
In Parish -v- The Danwood Group Ltd [2015] EWHC 940(QB) HH Judge Behrens (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered various issues relating to the costs budget at the end of a trial. THE CASE The claimants were…
CHANGES TO THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOLS THAT WE KNOW ABOUT: LOW VALUE ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS
Important changes have been made to the Pre-Action Protocols which came into force yesterday. At the moment the whereabout of the the Protocols is a mystery in that they have not been published generally. However there are some changes to…
LAY EVIDENCE AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: MORE IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER
In Wake -v- Johnson [2015] EWHC 276(QB) HH Judge Collender QC (Sitting as Judge of the High Court) conducted a critical analysis of the lay evidence and expert evidence when dismissing a clinical negligence claim against a GP. There are…
