PERSONAL PEJORATIVE REMARKS IN WITNESS STATEMENTS DO NOT HELP: RECENT DECISIONS AND A REVIEW OF THE CASES
Some recent comments by HHJ Edward Hess in TM -V- KM [2022] EWFC 155 as to the language used in witness statements gives me a chance to reprise the guidance as to the lack of wisdom of using intemperate language…
“HYPERBOLIC COMMENT” NOT WELCOME IN LITIGATION: HIGH COURT JUDGE SENDS OUT A WARNING: PLANE LANGUAGE IS BEST…
In Peregrine Aviation Bravo Ltd & Ors v Laudamotion GmbH & Anor [2023] EWHC 48 (Comm) Mr Justice Henshaw was critical of “hyperbolic comment” in relation to the witness evidence. This is not the first time that a judge has…
ADVOCATES SHOULD NOT SEND UNHERALDED SUBMISSIONS AFTER A HEARING: COURT OF APPEAL MESSAGE IN A POSTSCRIPT (NOW WITH A FURTHER CASE I HAD NOT THOUGHT OF EARLIER…)
There is a postscript to the judgment of Lady Justice Elisabeth Laing in the case of MH (Eritrea), R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2022] EWCA Civ 1296 discouraging the sending of unsolicited…
SKELETON ARGUMENTS: KEY POINTS AND ISSUES: A REMINDER
Periodically I reprise the links to online guidance on skeleton arguments. Here we have a series of links to posts and articles giving guidance on written submissions. “Sir James Hunt has told us of the (unattributed) judicial reaction on receiving…
APPEALS: POINTS OF LAW AND BUNDLES: LITIGANTS SHOWN THE YELLOW CARD: YOU CAN READ THE RULES HERE
In Banks v Blount [2022] EWHC 1491 (QB) Mr Justice Ritchie was critical of an appellant for failing to comply with two basic elements of the practice directions relating to appeals. The need for clarity and precision when referring to…
GUIDANCE FOR ADVOCATES: 12 JUDGES CAN’T BE WRONG – “ONLY JUDGES MAY MAKE BAD JOKES”
I am here re-visiting a series of posts from 2016, where we looked at guidance given to advocates by judges. As part of the series looking at the advice that judges give to advocates (and how this relates to civil…
SKELETON ARGUMENTS: NOT TOO LONG, NOT TOO SHORT: MISSIVE FROM THE HIGH COURT: THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING THEM “JUST RIGHT”
In Overd & Ors v The Chief Constable of Avon And Somerset Constabulary [2021] EWHC 3100 (QB) Mr Justice Linden reminded advocates of the guidance relating to skeleton arguments. One was too long, the other too short. THE…
“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…
THINGS THAT LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: SCOWL AND POUT… & ROLL YOUR EYES
For the past two weeks we have been looking at some of the judgments of Canadian judge Mr Justice Joseph W. Quinn. To complete the series we will look again at the guidance he gave to the Ontario Bar Association in…
DIVIDING FACTS FROM COMMENTS AND SUBMISSIONS: WHY IT MATTERS AND HOW IT CAN HELP YOUR CASE
The judgment is Scottow -v- Crown Prosecution Service [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin) is of interest for many reasons. This, however, is a blog about procedure. It is worthwhile looking at the comments that the Divisional Court made about the way…
REMOTE HEARINGS AND REMOTE ADVOCACY: USEFUL LINKS FROM THE UK AND BEYOND…
Lawyers all over the world are getting to grips with advocacy via a computer screen. This is an opportune time to look at the useful guidance out their for those undertaking and preparing hearings and trials that are heard remotely….
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW SERIES 4: PART 2: GET TO THE POINT QUICKLY
There are many posts on this blog under the “Judge’s guide to advocacy” series. Today’s post is based on a single tweet. The tweeter known as “Judgitis” wants people to get to the point quickly. THE TWEET Judge Itis@ItisJudge “If…
“PROCEDURAL RIGOUR IS IMPORTANT NOT FOR ITS OWN SAKE. IT IS IMPORTANT IN ORDER FOR JUSTICE TO BE DONE”
In R v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care and Secretary of State for Education ex parte Dolan and Others. [2020] EWCA Civ 1605 the Court of Appeal rejected an argument that the “lockdown” regulations were unlawful. However,…
IT’S NOT YOUR OPPONENT’S JOB TO POINT OUT OMISSIONS IN YOUR OWN EVIDENCE: A CLOSER LOOK AT ONE ASPECT OF PJSC TATNEFT
One particular aspect of the judgment in PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors [2020] EWHC 3250 (Comm) that warrants closer investigation. That is the claimant’s argument that it did not have notice that the defendants were going to invite the court…
TEN MORE PIECES OF ADVICE FOR THE YOUNG LAWYER: “INCIVILITY IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE”: “BE BRIEF”; “DON’T CRUMBLE”
I am using this week to look back a previous series where guidance was given, primarily by judges, to young advocates. There are links here to the original posts, and sources for the posts. Here we look at the second…
THE COLLECTIVE NAME FOR HAND UPS: A “BLIZZARD”OR “HARASSMENT”? WHY IS IT JUDGES LIKE BREVITY SO MUCH?
In his speech to the Peter Taylor memorial lecture “Complexity and Obscurity in the Law, and how we might mitigate them.” Lord Justice Irwin observed “there is a special ring in hell for the advocate who stands up at 10:31…
COVID REPEATS 19: THOSE ADVOCATES WHO ARE GOING TO HELL (AND NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE THE DEVIL’S ADVOCATES)
Some advocates are going to hell. This may seem obvious, but the details were fleshed out by Lord Justice Irwin when giving a talk to the Professional Negligence Bar Association on the 17th April 2018 . It is possible to…
COVID REPEATS 12: THINGS LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: “EVERY PIECE OF PAPER THAT LEAVES YOUR OFFICE IS AN ADVERTISEMENT FOR YOU AND YOUR LAW FIRM”
Here we are looking again at the advice given by the Canadian judge Mr Justice Joseph W. Quinn A Judge’s View: Things Lawyers Do to Annoy Judges; Things They Do to Impress Judges“.* This whole talk is worth reading, for…
THE INNS OF COURT COLLEGE OF ADVOCACY: PRINCIPLES FOR REMOTE ADVOCACY
In an extremely short amount of time the Inns of Court College of Advocacy has produced a remarkable guide “Principles for Remote Advocacy”. The document has entered the public domain today, with no restrictions on its use, it is available…
INNOVATIVE APPROACH WHEN PROPOSED APPELLANT UNABLE TO ATTEND COURT
In [2020] EWHC 735 (QB) Mrs Justice Tipples took an innovative approach to the problems caused by a claimant’s inability to attend court because of the coronavirus problems. The submissions were made by email. THE CASE The judge was…