Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Absent witnesses
MISSING WITNESSES: THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE

MISSING WITNESSES: THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE

September 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at the inferences that courts draw when witnesses do not give evidence at court. In Royal Mail Group Ltd v Efobi [2021] UKSC 33 the Supreme Court made it clear that the principles involved…

IT'S NOT YOUR OPPONENT'S JOB TO POINT OUT OMISSIONS IN YOUR OWN EVIDENCE: A CLOSER LOOK AT ONE ASPECT OF PJSC TATNEFT

IT’S NOT YOUR OPPONENT’S JOB TO POINT OUT OMISSIONS IN YOUR OWN EVIDENCE: A CLOSER LOOK AT ONE ASPECT OF PJSC TATNEFT

November 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Written advocacy

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…

ADVERSE INFERENCES DRAWN WHEN SOLICITOR DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE: IF YOU'VE HAD £22 MILLION YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN IT

ADVERSE INFERENCES DRAWN WHEN SOLICITOR DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE: IF YOU’VE HAD £22 MILLION YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN IT

January 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In The Lord Chancellor v Blavo & Co Solictors Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 3556 (QB) Mr Justice Pepperall found it was appropriate to draw adverse inferences when key  participants did not give evidence.  It is another example of the principles…

WHEN WITNESSES DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL 3: ADVERSE INFERENCES ARE DRAWN IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

WHEN WITNESSES DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL 3: ADVERSE INFERENCES ARE DRAWN IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

October 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

There are three cases today about the implications of witnesses not attending trial.  This was an issue in Asante v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 2570 (QB). The absence of key witnesses from the defendant led…

WHEN WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL 1: WITNESS EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: A BROKEN FINGER IS NOT A GOOD EXCUSE NOT TO ATTEND COURT

WHEN WITNESSES DO NOT ATTEND TRIAL 1: WITNESS EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED: A BROKEN FINGER IS NOT A GOOD EXCUSE NOT TO ATTEND COURT

October 10, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the first of two posts today in relation to witnesses not attending to be cross-examined.  In EC Medica Group UK Ltd & Ors v Dearnley-Davison & Ors [2018] EWHC 1952 (Ch) Kelyn Bacon QC (sitting as a Deputy High…

BUNDLES WERE A DOG'S DINNER: MISSING WITNESSES AND AN EXPERT WITH NO CONCEPT OF HIS DUTY TO THE COURT

BUNDLES WERE A DOG’S DINNER: MISSING WITNESSES AND AN EXPERT WITH NO CONCEPT OF HIS DUTY TO THE COURT

July 12, 2017 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Bank of Ireland -v- Watts Group PLC   [2017]EWHC 1667 (TCC) exemplifies many of the issues in litigation that are regularly covered in this blog: bundles, missing witnesses and errant experts. In particular…

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? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

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.