COST BITES 17: FAILURE TO ENGAGE WITH CRITICISM OF WITNESS STATEMENT LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS: FAILING TO ENGAGE ON WITNESS STATEMENT ISSUES CAN BE EXPENSIVE

COST BITES 17: FAILURE TO ENGAGE WITH CRITICISM OF WITNESS STATEMENT LEADS TO INDEMNITY COSTS: FAILING TO ENGAGE ON WITNESS STATEMENT ISSUES CAN BE EXPENSIVE

There is another judgment of the judgment in McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd v Construction Industry Training Board [2022] EWHC 2361 (Ch) Richard Farnhill (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) that is worth noting.  The claimant’s failure to…

FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PARTY WAS NOT "NIT PICKING"

FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PARTY WAS NOT “NIT PICKING”

In  McKinney Plant & Safety Ltd v Construction Industry Training Board [2022] EWHC 2361 (Ch) Richard Farnhill (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery Division) considered the appropriate response where a party fails to comply with the requirements for…

NINE YEARS ON III: 2015: WITNESS STATEMENTS - WHO SAYS YOU'LL WIN NOTHING WITH KIDS

NINE YEARS ON III: 2015: WITNESS STATEMENTS – WHO SAYS YOU’LL WIN NOTHING WITH KIDS

My, highly personal, selection of posts from each year moves on to 2015.  Here we look at a blog post from February 2015 about the decision in Woodland and Maxwell. This is a case that was subject to much interlocutory…

NINE YEARS ON 2: "DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS : THE QUESTIONS YOU ASK WILL DETERMINE THE ANSWERS YOU GET: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE"

NINE YEARS ON 2: “DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS : THE QUESTIONS YOU ASK WILL DETERMINE THE ANSWERS YOU GET: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE”

I am “reprinting” a post from every year that this blog has been going.  Today we have reached 2014.  A post on drafting witness statements and the asking of leading questions.  This is an ongoing issue. The drastic measures introduced…