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 17
WHEN THE WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: A RECAP

WHEN THE WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: A RECAP

May 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

“GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS”: THE ROLE OF VIDEO EVIDENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT OF CREDIBILITY AND DAMAGES

May 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT & CONSIDERS THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT & CONSIDERS THE IMPORTANT ROLE OF THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT

May 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

We have already looked at the decision in Perry -v- Raleys Solicitors [2017] EWCA Civ 314 in the context of the award of interest.   The decision also contains important observations about evidence and the way in which the courts approach…

PROVING THINGS 61: MORE ON SOCIAL MEDIA:  FACEBOOK ENTRIES AND  WITNESS CREDIBILITY

PROVING THINGS 61: MORE ON SOCIAL MEDIA: FACEBOOK ENTRIES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY

April 25, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS, DESTROYED DOCUMENTS AND THE DEFENDANT'S WITNESS WITH NO CREDIBILITY AT ALL

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS, DESTROYED DOCUMENTS AND THE DEFENDANT’S WITNESS WITH NO CREDIBILITY AT ALL

April 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

BANKS, WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY: AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT

BANKS, WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY: AN INTERESTING JUDGMENT

April 6, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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….

THE TRIAL JUDGE AND FINDINGS OF FACT:  COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT OVERTURN FINDINGS OF TRIAL JUDGE

THE TRIAL JUDGE AND FINDINGS OF FACT: COURT OF APPEAL DID NOT OVERTURN FINDINGS OF TRIAL JUDGE

April 1, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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?

WHEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE “INDEPENDENT” WITNESS IS NOT ACCEPTED: WHEN WE WILL EVER LEARN?

March 30, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

WHEN PUBLIC OFFICIALS MAKE WITNESS STATEMENTS: FAREPAK REVISITED

March 30, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

WHEN A PUBLIC OFFICIAL SIGNS A “CARELESS” WITNESS STATEMENT THAT WAS “FALSE AND TENDED TO MISLEAD”: NOT IMPRESSIVE TO SAY THE LEAST

March 28, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

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

“SOLICITOR FORCING ME TO SIGN AN INCORRECT WITNESS STATEMENT”: A VERY FRIGHTENING SEARCH TERM

March 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

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)

PROVING THINGS 59: TO GET SPECIAL DAMAGES YOU HAVE TO PLEAD THEM AND PROVE THEM (EVEN IN DEFAMATION CASES)

March 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

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…

APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF KNOWLEDGE IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE MIB

APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF KNOWLEDGE IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE MIB

March 21, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

THE PROCESS OF TAKING A STATEMENT: EXPLORED IN DETAIL IN OPEN COURT

THE PROCESS OF TAKING A STATEMENT: EXPLORED IN DETAIL IN OPEN COURT

March 8, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

WHERE DOES THE TRUTH LIE? GESTMIN IN THE FAMILY COURTS

March 5, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

A WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IS IN PURDAH: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER

A WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IS IN PURDAH: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Members Content, Striking out, Witness statements

The Employment Tribunal decision in Chidzoy -v- BBC (available here) contains an important lesson to lawyers and litigants alike.  A witness in the course of giving evidence is in “purdah” – in that they should not discuss the case with…

THE SELF-CONFIDENT WITNESSES THAT CONVINCE THEMSELVES BUT NO-ONE CAN RELY ON

THE SELF-CONFIDENT WITNESSES THAT CONVINCE THEMSELVES BUT NO-ONE CAN RELY ON

March 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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….

PROVING THINGS 55: I'LL SAY IT AGAIN: NO EVIDENCE - NO DAMAGES

PROVING THINGS 55: I’LL SAY IT AGAIN: NO EVIDENCE – NO DAMAGES

March 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

EVIDENCE IN PART 8 APPLICATIONS: APPLY IN ADVANCE OR YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ALLOWED TO CALL ANY

EVIDENCE IN PART 8 APPLICATIONS: APPLY IN ADVANCE OR YOU WILL PROBABLY NOT BE ALLOWED TO CALL ANY

February 26, 2017 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Civil evidence, Injunctions, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

EVIDENCE IN HOLIDAY ILLNESS CLAIMS: COURSE IN LIVERPOOL: 13th MARCH 2017: 2 – 4.30

February 26, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am presenting a course on behalf of Diversify Law Limited on “Evidence in Holiday Illness Claims”,  in Liverpool on the 13th March 2017 2 – 4.30. VENUE (CLOSE TO THE CAVERN) It is at the “Hard Days Night” Hotel….

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES:  IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS DID NOT DAMAGE CREDIBILITY (THIS TIME)

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS DID NOT DAMAGE CREDIBILITY (THIS TIME)

February 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

I spent a day this week giving a seminar to a specialist group of clinical negligence lawyers on the importance of witness statements.  I mention this because, as always happens, there is a clear example of this in the judgment…

ALL THE WITNESSES SAY EXACTLY THE SAME THING 10 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE (AND NOT BELIEVED)

ALL THE WITNESSES SAY EXACTLY THE SAME THING 10 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE (AND NOT BELIEVED)

February 23, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Patel -v- Patel [2017] Andrew Simmonds QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) was considering the credibility of witnesses.  The case is an interesting read in that it sets out detail of some of the cross-examination.  It…

PROVING THINGS 53: BECAUSE A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST SOME OF THE TIME IT DOESN’T MEAN THEY WERE DISHONEST ALL OF THE TIME

February 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Pemberton Greenish LLP -v- Henry [2017] EWHC 246 (QB) provides an interesting assessment of witness evidence and demonstrates the difficulty in proving dishonesty. Mr Justice Jeremy Baker held that the fact that a solicitor was negligent, breached…

ANODYNE WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHAT DOES IT TELL YOU WHEN A JUDGE PREFERS THE ORAL EVIDENCE OF A WITNESS- THAT CONTRADICTS THEIR WITNESS STATEMENT

February 16, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is an interesting observation in the judgment of Mrs Justice Rose in Singularis Holdings Ltd -v- Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd [2017] EWHC 257 (Ch).  It may well show much about the way in which witness statements are prepared. “……

THE MODERN JUDGE AND FACT FINDING: "TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION"

THE MODERN JUDGE AND FACT FINDING: “TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION”

February 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a full review of Sir Mark Hedley’s book The Modern Judge on Pink Tape, where Lucy Reed explains how the book mysteriously appeared in her hotel room the morning after the Family Law Awards. (Lucy speculates that Sir…

PROVING THINGS 51: NO EVIDENCE OF LOSS – NO DAMAGES: A LESSON TO SHARE

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

For the second time today we are looking at the judgment of Mrs Justice Proudman in Abbott -v- RCI Europe [2016] EWHC 2602 (Ch).  This time in relation to the failure of the claimants to quantify or prove they had…

YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE IDENTICAL: NOW THAT IS A COINCIDENCE

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are, it seems, litigators out there who believe that the filing of numerous identical witness statements adds weight to their case.   Advocates of this approach may want to read the judgment of  Mrs Justice Proudman in Abbott -v-…

THE JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE: AN ESSENTIAL SUMMARY

February 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  the judgment today in The Queen on the application of ASK -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] EWHC 196 (Admin) Mr Justice Green sets out a template for the judicial assessment of evidence.  It provides…

BANKERS, WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CREDIBILITY: THE ENIGMATIC WITNESS

February 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Nugee in Clydesdale Bank plc -v- Stoke Place Hotel Ltd (in administration) [2017] EWHC 181 (Ch) also contains an analysis of a witness who was “something of an enigma” “Although a witness statement should be…

WHAT INFERENCES SHOULD THE JUDGE DRAW WHEN A WITNESS CLAIMS PRIVILEGE AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION?

February 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Nugee in Clydesdale Bank plc -v- Stoke Place Hotel Ltd (in administration) [2017] EWHC 181 (Ch) is another one of those cases we will look at twice.  Both posts will be about the judge’s assessment…

EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT NECESSARY ON AN QUESTION OF CONSTRUCTION: SNEAKING EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO WITNESS STATEMENTS: EVIDENCE IS STRUCK OUT

February 3, 2017 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

We have seen several examples of litigants attempting to give “expert” evidence in their witness statements.  This practice was considered by Master Matthews in Change Red Limited -v- Barclays Bank PLC [2016] EWHC 3489 (Ch). The Master was considering whether…

BOOKS ABOUT ADVOCACY: MUNKMAN ON THE TECHNIQUE OF ADVOCACY

BOOKS ABOUT ADVOCACY: MUNKMAN ON THE TECHNIQUE OF ADVOCACY

February 2, 2017 · by gexall · in Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

Every litigator is an advocate, whether they know it or not.  Litigation is fundamentally about the art of persuasion.  This is a litigator’s daily task: in correspondence, on the phone, with the court.  This is best done by the careful…

PROVING THINGS 50: TO PROVE BREACH OF CONTRACT YOU FIRST HAVE TO PROVE THAT THERE WAS A CONTRACT

January 31, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Secker -v-Fairhill Property Services Ltd [2017] EWHC 69 (QB) may contain an important lesson about pleading as well as evidence.  The claimant’s claim could not be put in negligence and her case based…

JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY: “THE MOST DIFFICULT AND OPINIONATED WITNESS I HAVE EVER HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO ENCOUNTER”

January 30, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

We have looked at the process of judicial assessment of witness credibility many times on this blog. Many of the robust  judgments we have looked at  pale into insignificance next to the judgment of His Honour Judge Hodge QC in…

PROVING THINGS 49: IT IS DIFFICULT TO PROVE DAMAGES WHEN THE OPINION EVIDENCE IN YOUR WITNESS STATEMENT HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT

January 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

The dangers of giving opinion evidence in witness statements are highlighted in the judgment today  of Mr Justice Coulson in MacInnes -v- Gross [2017] EWHC 46 (QB). The opinion parts of the claimant’s witness statements were struck out. There was…

ADVISING ABOUT THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: YOU DON’T PAY ME TO TELL YOU WHAT YOU WANT TO HEAR: PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE ACTION AGAINST SOLICITORS DISMISSED

January 25, 2017 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Witness statements

In Seery -v- Leathes Prior (a firm) [2016] EWHC80 (QB) Sir David Eady dismissed a claim for negligence against a firm of solicitors.   One of the issues considered was whether the claimant should have been encouraged to litigate. The claim…

DISCLOSING DETAILS OF COSTS INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR MEDIATION : DISCLOSURE ALLOWED: HIGH COURT DECISION

January 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

In Savings Advice Limited -v- EDF Energy Customers Ltd [2017] EWHC B1 (Costs)  Master Haworth had to consider the issue of admissibility of evidence relating to a mediation. KEY POINTS Information provided about costs in the run up of a mediation…

PROVING THINGS 47:  FIRE IN THE LOFT: IT WASN'T THE MOUSE MAN AT ALL

PROVING THINGS 47: FIRE IN THE LOFT: IT WASN’T THE MOUSE MAN AT ALL

January 11, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Palmer -v- Nightingale [2016] EWHC 2800 (TCC) is another example of a claimant failing to prove their case. More curiously, in some respects, the claimant’s own evidence contradicted their case. “In circumstances where there…

LAWYERS, LITIGATION AND MEMORY III: THE GESTMIN PRINCIPLES APPLIED

January 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

“This may be an interesting year for the consideration of issues relating to the accuracy of memory.   An interesting case where the relevant principles were considered in detail can be found in the judgment in EF -v- The Catholic…

LAWYERS, LITIGATION & MEMORY II: HOW YOU ARE AFFECTING THE MEMORY OF WITNESSES (AND POSSIBLY SOWING THE SEEDS FOR DEFEAT)

January 9, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The post on “Lawyers, litigation and memory”clearly struck a chord. It had many hundreds of readers (on a Sunday too). It highlights the fact that a failure to be trained in, and consider, issues relating to memory, causes litigators numerous…

LAWYERS, LITIGATION & MEMORY: THE MEMORY ILLUSION

LAWYERS, LITIGATION & MEMORY: THE MEMORY ILLUSION

January 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

A single moment of logical thought will lead to the conclusion that it is strange that lawyers don’t learn about memory.  Much (indeed most) litigation relies on the memory of the parties.  Judges are, more often than not, called upon…

CIVIL LITIGATION REVIEW OF 2016: PROMISCUOUS BUNDLES & THAT CRAZY LITTLE THING CALLED PROPORTIONALITY

December 28, 2016 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Assessment of Costs, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Credibility of experts, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Injunctions, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This is the third annual review of the year on this blog. 2016, as ever, has been an interesting year.  As ever, a comprehensive review can be found in Herbert Smith Freehills A litigator’s yearbook: 2016 (England and Wales). PREDICTIONS…

ADVERSE INFERENCES NOT DRAWN WHEN WITNESSES ARE ABSENT: ANOTHER EXAMPLE

December 21, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

There are several posts on the blog which deal with the approach the trial judge takes when certain witnesses are not present.  In some cases it leads the judge to draw adverse inferences, in others it does not.  In Welds…

PROVING THINGS 45: IF YOU CAN'T PROVE LOSS THE DEFENDANT IS GOING TO GET SUMMARY JUDGMENT

December 18, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This series (and this blog) have looked at several cases where a party  has asserted a loss but not been able to prove it. There are a large number of cases where a party fails to put the basic information…

TAKING WITNESS STATEMENTS AND FACT FINDING: VEHEMENT CRITICISM (OF A SURPRISING SOURCE)

December 14, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The need to take care when drafting witness statements has been a regular theme of this blog. The delegating of witness statements to a party or client is an extremely dangerous (and foolish) practice.   I have also examined, regularly,…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, STATEMENTS OF TRUTH AND CONTEMPT OF COURT

December 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Slade in Aviva Insurance -v- Randive [2016] EWHC 3152 (QB) involves no findings of fact.  However it does demonstrate the dangers inherent in being involved in the drafting of witness statements and replies to Part…

PROVING THINGS 44: FINDINGS OF FACT, WALTER MITTY AND WITNESS TRAINING

December 12, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment today of Mr Justice Coulson in Harlequin Property (SVG) Limited -v- Wilkins Kennedy [2016] 3188 EWHC (TCC) shows the importance of the judge’s assessment of  witnesses. The judge made a clear and robust assessment of the witness evidence,…

PROVING THINGS 43: HOW THE COURT DECIDES: A PRIMER

December 7, 2016 · by gexall · in Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

The judgment of Master Matthews in Adepoju -v- Akinola [2016] EWHC 3160 (Ch) includes a useful primer on how the court goes about the task of deciding civil cases. “…the decision of the court is not necessarily the objective truth…

PROVING THINGS 42: SILENCE DOES NOT PROVE INDUCEMENT

December 2, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

We are returning to the case of Francis -v- Knapper [2016] EWHC 3093 (QB).  That case has been looked at in relation to a failure to prove damages.  However the claimants also had major evidential problems in proving misrepresentation. KEY POINTS…

PROVING THINGS 40: NO EVIDENCE – NO LOSS: LITIGATION IS NOT A WALK IN THE PARK

December 1, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

A constant motif in this series has been the ability of litigants to arrive at trial and not be able to prove central parts of their case – including damages.  This is exemplified in the judgment of Mr Justice Baker…

← Previous 1 … 16 17 18 … 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

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2026
  • COST BITES 397: THE PARTIES THAT SPENT £500,000 IN A DISPUTE THAT WAS WORTH £5,000: THE JUDGE FOUND GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS BUDGET (A CASE I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERY LITIGATOR TO READ)
  • CAN YOU CONVERT PART 7 PROCEEDINGS TO PART 8 PROCEEDINGS: THIS REMAINS AN OPEN QUESTION
  • COST BITES 396 : THE CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT WAS SUCH IT WAS APPROPRIATE TO AWARD INDEMNITY COSTS IN THE NATIONAL LOTTERY CASE; IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE TO REDUCE THE SUCCESSFUL DEFENDANTS’ COSTS
  • COST BITES 395: A RETAINER WAS NOT A CONTENTIOUS BUSINESS AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE TERMS IN RELATION TO HOURLY RATES RENDERED IT TOO UNCERTAIN (COURT OF APPEAL DECISION YESTERDAY)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.