Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Witness statements » Page 11
PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

PROVING THINGS 172: SPECULATION BY THE DEFENDANT IS NOT EVIDENCE: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

January 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Turner in Morrison v Liverpool Women’s NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 91 (QB) is another illustration of a party asserting something but having no evidence to support it.  This time it was a defendant whose…

REDACTING DOCUMENTS: MAY CAUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE MADE AND EXPLANATIONS MAY NEED TO BE GIVEN

REDACTING DOCUMENTS: MAY CAUSE ENQUIRIES TO BE MADE AND EXPLANATIONS MAY NEED TO BE GIVEN

January 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

One other aspect of the judgment of HHJ Lethem in Ivanoy -v- Lubble (Central London County Court 17th January 2020) is in the orders made after the judgment. It concerns the redaction of documents.   THE CASE The primary issue in the…

THE PRODUCTION  OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NOW BEING SUBJECT TO RESEARCH: CAN YOU HELP?

THE PRODUCTION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NOW BEING SUBJECT TO RESEARCH: CAN YOU HELP?

January 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at issues relating to the drafting of witness statements.   The Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research is carrying out research on this subject, in the context of witness evidence in employment tribunals, “Taking…

GIVING EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT HAPPENED 17 YEARS EARLIER: AN EXAMPLE IN THE CONTEXT OF CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE

GIVING EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT HAPPENED 17 YEARS EARLIER: AN EXAMPLE IN THE CONTEXT OF CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE

January 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked at the issues relating to memory and witness evidence many times.  Particularly the problems of people giving evidence many years after the event. An example of these difficulties can be seen in the judgment of Mrs…

APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 KEY POINTS

APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 KEY POINTS

January 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

We are now nearly six years on from the Denton decision and the principles are familiar to most litigators.  However applications for relief from sanctions are still a regular occurrence.  Success is never guaranteed. Here I want to look again at…

PROVING THINGS 171: A TALE OF TWO TELEVISION PRESENTERS (AND OF A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AT ALL ON VITAL ISSUES)

PROVING THINGS 171: A TALE OF TWO TELEVISION PRESENTERS (AND OF A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AT ALL ON VITAL ISSUES)

January 13, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of the Employment Tribunal in the case of Ahmed -v- BBC (10th January 2019) has already received wide publicity.  It is worthwhile looking at the paucity, often the total absence of evidence, on many key issues on the…

11th HOUR APPLICATION TO INTRODUCE NEW WITNESS EVIDENCE (AND A NEW CASE) REFUSED

11th HOUR APPLICATION TO INTRODUCE NEW WITNESS EVIDENCE (AND A NEW CASE) REFUSED

January 12, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Crumpler & Anor (Liquidators Of Peak Hotels And Resorts Ltd v Candey Limited [2019] EWHC 3558 (Ch) HHJ Davis-White QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a party relief from sanctions where witness statements were served late.  The…

ATTEMPTING TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN SUBMISSIONS AND SUBMISSIONS IN EVIDENCE: SHOULD THE TWAIN EVER MEET?

ATTEMPTING TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN SUBMISSIONS AND SUBMISSIONS IN EVIDENCE: SHOULD THE TWAIN EVER MEET?

January 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The  recent post on the Post Office case and the defendant’s attempts to introduce new evidence at the submissions stage has caused me to revisit a post from several years ago.  This was, in turn, caused by a recollection of…

PROVING THINGS 170: YOU CAN'T GIVE EVIDENCE BY WAY OF SUBMISSIONS (HONESTLY, YOU CAN'T)

PROVING THINGS 170: YOU CAN’T GIVE EVIDENCE BY WAY OF SUBMISSIONS (HONESTLY, YOU CAN’T)

January 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

One important aspect of the judgment in Bates & Ors v the Post Office Ltd (No 6: Horizon Issues) [2019] EWHC 3408 (QB) is the judge’s criticism of the defendant’s attempt to give “evidence” at the stage of closing submissions….

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE - A ROUND UP OF THE ROUND UPS: WHAT TO FRET ABOUT AND WHAT NOT TO FRET ABOUT...

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – A ROUND UP OF THE ROUND UPS: WHAT TO FRET ABOUT AND WHAT NOT TO FRET ABOUT…

December 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Useful links, Witness statements, Written advocacy

There have been a series of annual reviews on key topics throughout December.  To round off the year it seemed a good idea to provide a reminder of them all and put the links in one place 2019 AND CIVIL…

CIVIL LITIGATION CASE OF THE YEAR: BATES -v- THE POST OFFICE: LITIGATING IN THE FACE OF "INSTITUTIONAL PARANOIA"

CIVIL LITIGATION CASE OF THE YEAR: BATES -v- THE POST OFFICE: LITIGATING IN THE FACE OF “INSTITUTIONAL PARANOIA”

December 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

There was never any doubt in my mind as to the civil litigation case of the year –  Bates -v- The Post Office.   All civil litigation  is here, witness and expert evidence, allegations of bias, disclosure and much more.  One…

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: TO WHAT EXTENT IS "HYPOTHETICAL" EVIDENCE FROM DOCTORS ADMISSIBLE?

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: TO WHAT EXTENT IS “HYPOTHETICAL” EVIDENCE FROM DOCTORS ADMISSIBLE?

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert in AB v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 3542 (QB), provides an important lessons for those who draft witness statements, particularly on behalf of defendants in clinical negligence cases.   The question is…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995

December 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Deputy Master Linwood in Barnaby & Anor v Johnson (aka Smith) [2019] EWHC 3344 (Ch) provides a reminder of the terms of Section 4 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and an example of its application.  …

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP - NOVEMBER 2019

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – NOVEMBER 2019

November 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we have links to blogs and articles about civil procedure and costs from November 2019. COSTS Costs Barrister Blaming others Costs Barrister The undiscovered country Herbert Smith Freehills Court of Appeal confirms jurisdiction to award claimant interim payment on account of costs…

WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

November 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 makes some important points in relation to civil evidence.  It reviews the law relating to the drawing of adverse inferences due…

WHEN WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: THIS RARELY TURNS OUT WELL: (WHEN THEY SIGN THE SAME STATEMENT, IT COULD BE WORSE...)

WHEN WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: THIS RARELY TURNS OUT WELL: (WHEN THEY SIGN THE SAME STATEMENT, IT COULD BE WORSE…)

November 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There has been a brief exchange on Twitter this morning. Someone has been served with a  single witness statement  – signed by three people.  There are manifest breaches of the rules here.  It is another example of a statement being…

PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT'S WITNESSES

PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESSES

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Witness statements

There are a number of interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Coe in Esegbona v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (false imprisonment in hospital) [2019] EWHC 77 (QB). One of which is the defendant’s failure to call any…

LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL...): MASTER'S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING

LAWYERS: JUDGES SO WANT TO SEE ALL THE CORRESPONDENCE (AND TO BE TOLD ABOUT IT AS WELL…): MASTER’S POINT OF PRACTICE WORTH READING

November 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There are some observations in the judgment of Master Thornett in Palizban v Protech (UK) Ltd [2019] EWHC 3090 (QB) that every litigator should read.  It relates to the manner in which solicitors present witness statements, and documents, in interlocutory…

STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

STAGE 3 PROCEEDINGS AND LATE SERVICE OF EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

November 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of the Court of Appeal yesterday in Wickes Building Supplies Ltd v Blair [2019] EWCA Civ 1934  is an important one in relation to late service of evidence and Stage 3 of the Protocol.  It shows the importance…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 70: OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS

November 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There have been several recent cases in which the courts have emphasised the difference between knowledge and “opinion” in witness evidence. In Irani v Duchon [2019] EWCA Civ 1846 the Court of Appeal dismissed an argument that the defendant was…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 69 : SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE LITIGATOR: A RECAP

November 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

The earlier post on the judgment last  Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 was another case in which social media played a part.  The defendant holiday company found social media entries which appeared inconsistent…

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE BROUGHT IN RELATION TO PRE-ACTION WITNESS STATEMENTS:  COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE AMENDED TO ALLEGE FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE IN THE COURSE OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS

COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE BROUGHT IN RELATION TO PRE-ACTION WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS CAN BE AMENDED TO ALLEGE FALSE STATEMENTS ARE MADE IN THE COURSE OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS

November 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Committal proceedings, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 the Court of Appeal held that committal proceedings can be brought in relation to allegedly false witness statements made and disclosed under the pre-action protocols.  It is…

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN'T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN’T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

November 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The danger of witness statements from solicitors purporting to give evidence as to fact has been emphasised many times in the cases reported on the blog.   The danger can be seen again in the judgment of Ms Pat Treacy (sitting…

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 5: THINGS WILL GO WRONG: "YOU GOTTA HAVE A PLAN": DON'T CRASH...

STAYING SANE AS A LITIGATOR 5: THINGS WILL GO WRONG: “YOU GOTTA HAVE A PLAN”: DON’T CRASH…

October 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Relief from sanctions, Service of the claim form, Serving documents, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

No matter how hard you try, on occasions, things will go wrong in litigation.  Do you have a plan?  Here we examine the need to have a plan to cover default and other issues in litigation. We then look in…

PROVING THINGS 167: BUNDLES, EXPERTS, ABSENT WITNESS, UNPLEADED DEFENCES AND... SEWAGE: ALL MODERN LITIGATION IS HERE...

PROVING THINGS 167: BUNDLES, EXPERTS, ABSENT WITNESS, UNPLEADED DEFENCES AND… SEWAGE: ALL MODERN LITIGATION IS HERE…

October 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

 The judgment of HHJ Russen (QC) (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Kivells Ltd v Torridge District Council [2019] EWHC 2846 (TCC), contains a number of interesting scenarios in relation  to civil evidence.  Many  of the common problems of…

WITNESS SUMMARIES,  WITNESS SUMMONSES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL IN ONE CASE...

WITNESS SUMMARIES, WITNESS SUMMONSES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: ALL IN ONE CASE…

October 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Morley (t/a Morley Estates) v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc [2019] EWHC 2865 (Ch) Mr Justice Kerr granted the claimant’s application to rely on witness summaries and refused the defendant’s application to set aside witness summonses.  The judge…

PROVING THINGS 166:  LYING  IN COURT (& HOW THE JUDGE DECIDES WHO IS...)

PROVING THINGS 166: LYING IN COURT (& HOW THE JUDGE DECIDES WHO IS…)

October 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

A search term led someone to this blog today “how is it legal to get away with lying in court”.  There is a whole host of material on the question of what is a “lie”, compared to a false or…

HEATED LANGUAGE AND CAREFULLY CRAFTED WITNESS STATEMENTS: "METAPHORS OF WAR" RARELY (IF EVER) HELP IN LITIGATION

HEATED LANGUAGE AND CAREFULLY CRAFTED WITNESS STATEMENTS: “METAPHORS OF WAR” RARELY (IF EVER) HELP IN LITIGATION

October 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Alesco Risk Management Services Ltd & Ors v Bishopsgate Insurance Brokers Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 2839 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman considered the language used in witness statements.  The heat generated by intemperate language rarely helped the litigants involved….

WHY PROCEDURAL RULES ARE IMPORTANT (AND LEAD TO SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE): "JUDGES ARE NOT SUPERHUMAN, AND DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS"

WHY PROCEDURAL RULES ARE IMPORTANT (AND LEAD TO SUBSTANTIVE JUSTICE): “JUDGES ARE NOT SUPERHUMAN, AND DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS”

October 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

In  Paralel Routs Ltd v Fedotov [2019] EWHC 2656 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a judge of the High Court) emphasised the importance of procedural rules.   There are quite a few interesting observations in relation to disclosure, redaction, civil…

"NOT ALL JUDGES OR COUNSEL ARE HUMOURLESS AUTOMATONS": NO JUDICIAL BIAS WHEN EVIDENCE GIVEN BY WAY OF A SONG

“NOT ALL JUDGES OR COUNSEL ARE HUMOURLESS AUTOMATONS”: NO JUDICIAL BIAS WHEN EVIDENCE GIVEN BY WAY OF A SONG

October 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

It is not often that appeals over planning decisions make their way to this blog. It must be even rarer for such appeals to consider the question and appropriateness of humour (and song) in the judicial process. That is what…

THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

THE BACK TO BASICS SERIES: A RUNNING ACCOUNT: READ THEM ALL HERE

October 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Costs budgeting, Experts, Limitation, Members Content, QOCS, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

  The “Back to Basics” series, as the title suggests, deals with some of the basic elements of civil procedure. It covers everything from applications and bundles to the taking of witness statements.  The titles are often prompted by elements…

THE TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE LEADS TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED

THE TRIAL JUDGE SHOULD HAVE FOUND THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE LEADS TO QOCS BEING DISAPPLIED

October 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

In Haider v DSM Demolition Ltd [2019] EWHC 2712 (QB) Mr Justice Julian Knowles refused a claimant’s appeal against a finding that the defendant was not negligent. He granted the defendant relief from sanctions and allowed an appeal against a…

THE "BAD SINGING" CASE GETS TWO ENCORES: JUDGE FAILED TO MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT ON KEY ISSUES

THE “BAD SINGING” CASE GETS TWO ENCORES: JUDGE FAILED TO MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT ON KEY ISSUES

October 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I wrote about the first instance decision in Kogan v Martin & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1645 here.  The Court of Appeal have ordered a retrial in the case.   There are important observations about the role of the judge in…

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT'S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE  OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT’S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

October 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) Master Davison allowed the claimant to produce as evidence the tapes they had recorded of their consultations with the defendant’s medical experts.   This decision raises some interesting issues. (The case…

DISTRICT JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE "PARTIALLY" RECUSED THEMSELVES: THINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A VERY INTERESTING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS...

DISTRICT JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE “PARTIALLY” RECUSED THEMSELVES: THINGS THAT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A VERY INTERESTING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS…

October 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for providing me a copy of the judgment in Akers -v- Kirlkland [2019] EWHC 2176 (QB) Mr Justice Waksman discussed, in detail, the circumstances in which a judge should recuse themselves and…

THE HONEST WITNESS WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ACCEPTED - BUT WHO STILL WON HER CASE: A CLOSE ANALYSIS OF  THE LAY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN MORDEL

THE HONEST WITNESS WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ACCEPTED – BUT WHO STILL WON HER CASE: A CLOSE ANALYSIS OF THE LAY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN MORDEL

October 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

The result of the judgment today  in Mordel v Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2591 (QB) has already been well publicised.  A mother succeeded in her claim that the defendant trust was negligent in failing to check her…

WHEN WITNESSES ATTEMPT TO GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE: LOOK OUT FOR THOSE PURPLE PASSAGES

WHEN WITNESSES ATTEMPT TO GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE: LOOK OUT FOR THOSE PURPLE PASSAGES

October 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has reported on numerous cases where lay witnesses have attempted to give expert evidence (and, indeed, where expert witnesses have tried to give evidence of matters of fact).  This issue can be seen in the judgment of Lord…

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT'S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT’S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This series looks at the question of when, if ever, it is appropriate for a solicitor to swear an affidavit or make a statement in place of the client? This issue was considered by Stanley Burnton J in Bracken Partners…

LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS SUMMARIES: HERE'S AN INGENIOUS ARGUMENT - THAT DIDN'T WORK: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FROM PARTIES OWN WITNESS ALSO REFUSED

LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS SUMMARIES: HERE’S AN INGENIOUS ARGUMENT – THAT DIDN’T WORK: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FROM PARTIES OWN WITNESS ALSO REFUSED

September 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Smith & Anor v Crawshay [2019] EWHC 2507 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews considered an argument that the defendant was allowed to rely on a witness summary.  He also refused permission to adduce further evidence in evidence-in-chief from a witness…

AUTOMATICALLY CREATED NAME AT THE FOOT OF AN EMAIL CREATES BINDING CONTRACT TO SELL LAND: "MANY THANKS" FOR THIS

AUTOMATICALLY CREATED NAME AT THE FOOT OF AN EMAIL CREATES BINDING CONTRACT TO SELL LAND: “MANY THANKS” FOR THIS

September 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHJ Pearce in Neocleous & Anor v Rees [2019] EWHC 2462 (Ch) is not about procedure.  However it is a judgment that many litigators must become familiar with. An automatically generated name at the end of an…

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 3: THE SOLICITOR (GIVING EVIDENCE WHILST REPRESENTING HIS CLIENTS) HAD BECOME FAR TOO CLOSE TO THE CASE TO BE OBJECTIVE

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 3: THE SOLICITOR (GIVING EVIDENCE WHILST REPRESENTING HIS CLIENTS) HAD BECOME FAR TOO CLOSE TO THE CASE TO BE OBJECTIVE

September 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In the third post on the dangers of lawyers giving evidence we are looking at the judgment of Recorder Monty QC in   Afia v Mellor & Anor [2013] EW Misc 23 (CC). The only witness called for the defendants was…

PROVING THINGS 162: WHEN THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T HAVE THE COMMONS TOUCH

PROVING THINGS 162: WHEN THE GOVERNMENT DOESN’T HAVE THE COMMONS TOUCH

September 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Constitutional lawyers will be writing about the Supreme Court decision today for decades to come.   However I want to look at the more basic issue of the evidence that was placed before the courts.    This was not a case…

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 2: "HARD TO FATHOM" WHY THE SOLICITOR WAS TENDERED AS A WITNESS

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 2: “HARD TO FATHOM” WHY THE SOLICITOR WAS TENDERED AS A WITNESS

September 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

 In the second post about the dangers of lawyers giving evidence we turn to the judgment  of Master Marsh in  Pineport Limited -v- Grangeglen Ltd [2016] EWHC 1318 (Ch).  This was a relief from forfeiture hearing in which the only witness…

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 1:  ENGAGING "TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATELY WITH LEGAL SUBMISSIONS"

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 1: ENGAGING “TOTALLY INAPPROPRIATELY WITH LEGAL SUBMISSIONS”

September 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

An earlier post reported on the dangers of lawyers giving evidence when that “evidence” is in fact a set of legal submissions.   It is clear that this issue is not confined to one jurisdiction. This can be seen from the…

"WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SKELETON ARGUMENT AND A WITNESS STATEMENT?" NOW THERE'S A QUESTION...

“WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SKELETON ARGUMENT AND A WITNESS STATEMENT?” NOW THERE’S A QUESTION…

September 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

That very question “the difference between a skeleton argument and a witness statement” appeared in a search that led someone to this blog today.   It may be worrying that someone has to ask.  The important distinction is often ignored. Day…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 63: WHEN WILL THE COURT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF WITNESSES ALLOWED?

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 63: WHEN WILL THE COURT REDUCE THE NUMBER OF WITNESSES ALLOWED?

September 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we are looking at CPR 32.2 (3) which gives the court express powers to identify or limit the number of witnesses a party may call. That power has now been considered several times by the courts. Firstly  by Mr…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 62: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS WHEN INTERVIEWING WITNESSES - CAN (OR WILL) LEAD TO PROBLEMS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 62: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS WHEN INTERVIEWING WITNESSES – CAN (OR WILL) LEAD TO PROBLEMS

September 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Examination in chief is rare in civil cases, many (perhaps most) practitioners will never have seen it done in court.   There is a rule against asking leading questions  when taking a witness through their evidence.   There is a good reason…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

September 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post on the judgment in Baynton-Williams v Baynton-Williams [2019] EWHC 2179 (Ch) gives me a chance to return to a hobby horse – the need to give the source of information and belief when signing a witness statement.  Here…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DANGERS OF INADVERTENTLY MISLEADING THE COURT: CHECK BEFORE YOU ASSERT (ALSO A MESSAGE HERE FOR EXPERTS)

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DANGERS OF INADVERTENTLY MISLEADING THE COURT: CHECK BEFORE YOU ASSERT (ALSO A MESSAGE HERE FOR EXPERTS)

September 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The judgment of Master Clark in Baynton-Williams v Baynton-Williams [2019] EWHC 2179 (Ch) contains a number of important lessons : (i) for anyone preparing a witness statement to be careful not to inadvertently mislead the court; (ii) for experts – on…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 59: WHEN A CLIENT DISOWNS THEIR OWN WITNESS STATEMENT? SELF PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 59: WHEN A CLIENT DISOWNS THEIR OWN WITNESS STATEMENT? SELF PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER

August 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Witness statements

There has been much discussion on Twitter tonight in relation to the language used in witness statements. That led to this account being given by “Sweary Expat” a lawyer based in the Cayman Islands (some people clearly have to suffer…

← Previous 1 … 10 11 12 … 24 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILDREN AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION 2026: WEBINAR 30th JUNE 2026
  • COST BITES 406: CAN A PARTY RECOVER UNNECESSARY COSTS AS DAMAGES? THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN UNNECESSARY SECOND ACTION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • THE WEBINAR ON THE SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION: WHAT LITIGATION FIRMS NEED TO KNOW: TOGETHER WITH LOTS OF CHECKLISTS AND TEMPLATESNOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • COST BITES 405: SHOULD A SUCCESSFUL CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT LEAD TO A DEDUCTION OF 45% OF THEIR COSTS? A TOOTH DECISION…
  • SHOULD THE COURT ALLOW A “NEWLY APPOINTED” EMPLOYEE TO REPRESENT A LIMITED COMPANY AT A HEARING?

Top Posts

NEW COURT FEES COMING INTO FORCE ON THE 13th JULY 2026: SOME BRAND NEW PROVISIONS AND THE INFLATIONARY INCREASES: THE CIVIL AND FAMILY COURTS, THE MAGISTRATES' COURT, THE LANDS CHAMBER (AND MANY OTHERS)
A NEW SERIES OF USEFUL ONLINE CALCULATORS FOR LITIGATORS AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION (WITH A 20% DISCOUNT FOR CLB READERS): MAKING IT ALL ADD UP
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: MAKING AN APPLICATION TO THE COURT: HOW TO AVOID PROBLEMS: KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL CHECKLISTS
COST BITES 404: JUDGE ORDERS DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS: PARTIES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO ENGAGE WITH THE PROCESS OF LITIGATION: "THEY SHOULD BE USING NON-COURT BASED DISPUTE RESOLUTION WHEREVER POSSIBLE"
THE COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS A JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISION IN FAVOUR OF A SOLICITOR: THE OMBUDSMAN GOT NOTHING WRONG (QUITE A LOT HERE ABOUT VULNERABLE CLIENTS AS WELL...)

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.