THROWBACK FRIDAY: GESTMIN GUIDANCE IN THE CONTEXT OF CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES (WITH A CHANCE TO REMEMBER HH ALAN GORE K.C.) : JULY 2019
Here we look at a post from July 2019. It gives me a chance to remember the judge in question HH Alan Gore who sadly died in December last year. This is one of his judgments about the Gestmin criteria…
TWO PROCEDURAL POINTS TO WATCH: GIVING REMOTE EVIDENCE FROM ABROAD: SEEKING COSTS BEFORE THE FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL
Here we are looking “preliminary matters” in a judgment that highlight two procedural issues. One of them is of general relevance, the other more specific but still of significance, particularly for those who are unfamiliar with procedure in the General…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: LARGE PARTS OF THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE STRUCK OUT: “INADMISSIBLE AS A MATTER OF LAW” “OF MARGINAL RELEVANCE” AND DEAL WITH “WHOLLY COLLATERAL ISSUES”
Here we have a case where the court was asked to exclude large parts of a party’s witness statements. That application was successful in part. The judge finding that many of the statements, or parts of the statements, were simply…
GENERAL DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY – THE KEY ISSUES CONSIDERED: WEBINAR 30th JULY 2026
Psychiatric injury claims raise some of the most challenging issues in personal injury litigation. Questions frequently arise as to whether a claimant has suffered a recognised psychiatric illness, how damages should be assessed, the role of expert evidence, and how…
AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT FOR ABUSE OR PROCESS ADJOURNED – TO SEE WHETHER THIS NEED HAPPEN ON A “ROLLING BASIS”: ONE THOUSAND CLAIMANTS STARTED BUT ARE UNLIKELY TO FINISH…
Here we have a case where it appears that 1,000 claimants involved in Group Litigation will seek to discontinue. This fact becoming clear less than a month after the Group Litigation Order was made. The judge declined to strike out…
LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OR NOT…) AND THE COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS “WHAT IS A TRIAL?”: THE DEFINITION PROVES TO BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR THIS APPELLANT…
One of the key factors in this Court of Appeal judgment was the meaning of the word “trial”. Curiously this is not defined in the rules and has only been considered in two previous cases. The issue was important…
EXPERT WATCH 63: WHEN A DOCTOR WRITES TO THE COURT AND THE JUDGE FINDS THE INFORMATION “UNRELIABLE”
There have been a number of cases where the courts have considered letters, or less formal “reports”, provided by doctors to support elements of a litigant’s case, usually in relation to an application for adjournment or procedural issue. There was…
EXPERT WATCH 62: ANOTHER CASE WHERE THE EXPERT DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE “BOLAM” TEST: PLUS THE DANGERS OF INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT BY A “PORTAL”
For the second time today I am writing about a case where the trial judge was concerned that an expert witness for the claimant did not fully understand the “Bolam” test. The concern also extends to the way in which…
EXPERT WATCH 61: THE EXPERT WAS TELLING ME WHAT THEY WOULD HAVE DONE RATHER THAN APPLYING THE BOLAM STANDARD: CLAIMANT’S CASE FAILS AT TRIAL
This case looks at a common issue in relation to experts, particularly in clinical negligence cases. Specialists can report on what they would have done (given their own level of expertise) rather than what the “reasonable” practitioner would have done. …
FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: HOW SHOULD CARE DEPENDENCY BE ASSESSED? DOES IT END IF A WIDOW GOES INTO A NURSING HOME
Here we have a detailed consideration of some of the key points in relation to fatal accident damages. In particular how claims for loss of a carer should be assessed. These are central issues in many cases and there is…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY (2): WHEN A WITNESS GETS COACHING FROM ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE – WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS?
Artificial Intelligence continues to give rise to novel legal issues. In this case the courts had to consider the impact of clear evidence that the complainant in a criminal case had received detailed “coaching” by the use of A.I. …
PROVING THINGS 294: THE CLAIMANT ESTABLISHES EVERY ELEMENT OF LIABILITY IN ITS CLAIM FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT: DAMAGES WERE ONE POUND…
This is almost a “classic” example of a failure to prove things. The claimant established that the defendant was in breach of contract and that certain exclusion clauses did not apply. However it ended up with damages of £1.00. The…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A JUDGE IS NOT BOUND TO ACCEPT ALL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE: THE CLAIMANT “HONESTLY BELIEVED” THE CASE BUT THIS DID NOT PROVE IT…
We are looking at a case where an unsuccessful claimant attempted to argue that the trial judge had got the facts wrong, in particular there was a failure to take account of documentary evidence. This judgment highlights the difficulties of…
DAMAGES FOR PAIN SUFFERING AND LOSS OF AMENITY: RECENT CASES AND WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM THEM: WEBINAR 23rd JULY 2026
Every personal injury claim includes a claim for damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenity. Yet it is often the least analysed part of the claim. Awards are frequently based on broad assumptions, whilst opportunities to maximise a proper…
EXPERT WATCH 60: THE JUDGE’S ASSESSMENT OF THE EXPERTS IN THE DIESEL EMISSIONS CASE: AN EXHAUSTING TRIAL?
We are looking here at a major case where the claimants were heavily reliant on expert evidence. They way in which the judge viewed the experts was crucial. This was not a case where the judge found fault with the…
CAN THE WAY IN WHICH A CLAIMANT HAS CONDUCTED A CASE MEAN THAT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE SUMMARY JUDGMENT: “CLEAN HANDS” AND OTHER EQUITABLE MAXIMS CONSIDERED
We are looking at an unusual set of arguments here. The defendant, in resisting an application for summary judgment, submitted that the way in which the claimant had conducted the litigation itself meant the court should not grant judgment. It…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: EXPERT WITNESSES HAVE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE SAME MATERIAL: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE LEVEL PLAYING FIELD
The post earlier this morning set out the judge’s reservations about the nature of the information given to the claimant’s experts. In particular the failure to give the sources of their information. In fact the requirements go further than that. …
MAZUR MATTERS 65 (YES THEY ARE STILL CROPPING UP…): WAS A COMPANY SUING FOR A DEBT IT HAD PURCHASED BREACHING THE LEGAL SERVICES ACT?
Here we are looking at an argument that a company, that had purchased a debt and issued proceedings, was breaching the Legal Services Act. The argument was forcibly put and, just as forcibly, rejected. The judge was clear that a…
EXPERT WATCH 58: SHOULD A DEFENDANT HAVE PERMISSION TO RELY UPON A NEW EXPERT WHICH WOULD LEAD TO THE TRIAL DATE BEING VACATED?
Here we have a case where a defendant applied, late in the day, for an expert in a different discipline to those that had reported to date. Further that application was heard a month before the trial date. The judge…
“I HAD NEVER COME ACROSS A CASE IN WHICH SO LITTLE RESPECT HAD BEEN PAID TO THE COURT”: INACCURATE TIME ESTIMATES; OVER-LENGTHY SKELETONS; ENORMOUS BUNDLES (OH AND AN ATTITUDE OF “WE’LL COME INTO COURT WHEN WE WANT TO”…): I CAN’T RECALL JUDICIAL CRITICISM MUCH STRONGER THAN THIS,
Over the years we have looked at some fairly “vigorous” judicial criticisms of litigators and non-compliance with procedural requirements. This case contains some of the the most vigorous I have seen. The judge points to wholesale failures by both sides…
COST BITES 414 : A WITHDRAWN PART 36 OFFER STILL HAD AN IMPACT ON THE AWARD OF COSTS: CLAIMANTS COULD NOT RECOVER COSTS AFTER DATE OF OFFER
In this case the judge considered the question of whether a Part 36 offer that was withdrawn after trial should have any impact on the award of costs. The judge held that it should. If the claimants had accepted they…
CIVIL PROCEDURE, OPAQUE EVIDENCE AND “YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN”: ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN REJECTED BY THE COURTS – TWO EXAMPLES AND THE UNHAPPY CONSEQUENCES FOR THE LITIGANTS…
We are looking at an argument deployed in a case we considered earlier today. It was an argument that the defendants should have been able to “divine” from the oblique nature of the claimant’s evidence that funding was not in…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN DOES A WITNESS BECOMES A “HOSTILE WITNESS”? WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES?
Earlier this week we looked at a case where a judge allowed the claimants’ application for an order that one of the witnesses they had called be declared a “hostile witness”. This meant that the claimants could then cross-examine their…
CAN THE WORDING OF A COVERING LETTER ENCLOSING TERMS OF BUSINESS FROM A SOLICITOR TO A CLIENT GIVE RISE TO AN ESTOPPEL SO AS TO PREVENT RELIANCE ON THOSE TERMS?
Here we look at a case where a solicitor’s (former) client argued that the wording of a covering letter enclosing the firm’s terms and conditions meant that they were estopped from relying on those terms. It is an interesting example…
WAS A SOLICITOR’S CAP ON LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENCE TO £3 MILLION “REASONABLE”: COULD IT SURVIVE THE UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT REQUIREMENTS?
One of the issues in this case related to whether a solicitor’s contractual cap of £3 million was reasonable. The solicitor’s terms of business limited liability to £3 million. Could that cap, on the facts of this case, survive the…
WHY PRINCE HARRY (AND OTHER PROMINENT CLAIMANTS) LOST WHEN THE JUDGE FOUND THAT THEY WERE ALL HONEST WITNESSES – BUT OTHER WITNESSES THEY CALLED PROVED TO BE “HOSTILE”
We are looking at a judgment that has already received major attention from the media. A number of prominent people brought a civil action against Associated Newspapers. The judge found that they were all honest witnesses. However honesty did not…
HALLUCINATED CASE LAW AND THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE (OF ALL BODIES…)
All cases of hallucinated cases are serious, however some may be more serious than others. If we have a situation where the Crown Prosecution Service files documents which rely on cases that simply do not exist, this has to be…
COST BITES 411: NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST CLAIMANT’S DIRECTOR : HE WHO EXPECTS TO BENEFIT RUNS A RISK OF PAYING THE COSTS…
This case considers the issue of whether it was appropriate to make a non-party costs order. The Master reached a clear conclusion that it was. The individual in question was effectively the driving force behind the litigation in addition to…
THE TCC GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE: A DETAILED EXAMINATION
The section on the use of AI in the latest edition of The Technology and Construction Court Guide is relatively short. However it is significant. It shows that the courts recognise that AI is going to be used. “All legal…
NEW (4th) EDITION OF THE TECHNOLOGY AND CONSTRUCTION COURT GUIDE 2026: A QUICK GUIDE TO THE CHANGES AND THE NEW PARTS
The Fourth Edition of the Technology and Construction Court Guide came into force on 1 July 2026. It is much more than a routine update. Whilst much of the familiar structure remains, there are significant additions reflecting changes in legislation,…
EXPERT WATCH 57: JUDGE DECIDES THAT AN EXPERT, THAT HAS NOT COMPLIED WITH THEIR DUTIES TO THE COURT, SHOULD BE NAMED; “HE HAD A CHOICE TO INVOLVE HIMSELF IN THESE PROCEEDINGS AND TO BE PAID FOR DOING SO…”
Here we are looking at a decision related to the case we looked at yesterday relating to a medical expert in a family case. The judge gave a decision on whether an expert, who she found had failed in their…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A LITIGATOR MAKES A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENT: A USEFUL CHECKLIST ON THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
We have looked several times recently at the problems caused when a litigator serves their own witness evidence on behalf of a client, particularly a “corporate” client. It often turns out that large parts of this statement are inadmissible, consisting…
EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
One of the fascinating things about procedure is how the same principles apply across a whole range of cases. This is particularly the case with issues relating to evidence, particularly expert evidence. Earlier we looked at expert evidence in relation…
EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN
It is never helpful to a party’s case when a judge comes to the conclusion that the expert they have instructed is partisan. We have an example of this in this extremely high value case. There is interesting commentary on…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY (2): A SERIES OF CHECKLISTS TO HELP YOU WITH DRAFTING STATEMENTS FOR “CORPORATE” CLIENTS: THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
The normal post on back to basics came out a day early (due to an “administrative” error). However it does give us a chance to revisit the practical implications when a litigator has to draft a witness statement on behalf…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IN A WITNESS STATEMENT WHEN THERE IS A CORPORATE CLIENT: PROBLEMS KEEP OCCURRING
Today we are looking at what is a common issue, and common mistake, when someone makes a witness statement for, or on behalf of a corporate client. The CPR expressly provides that a witness must state the source of “information…
COST BITES 408: WHO (IF ANYONE) SHOULD PAY THE COSTS WHEN THE COURT MAKES NO DECISION ON THE SUBSTANTIVE ISSUE?
In this case the judge considered an argument that a claimant who made, but failed, in an application for an interim injunction should not necessarily be liable for costs. This argument was put forward on the basis that the court…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: “WHICH WITNESS WILL BE BELIEVED? IS IT ALL A LOTTERY? (JULY 2014): ISSUES OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY CONSIDERED
This week we go back 12 years to look at one of the recurring themes of this blog: witness credibility. We looked at a judgment which was all about the judge’s assessment of the witnesses. This was made more difficult…
EXPERT WATCH 54 : THE DEPUTY MASTER SHOULD NOT HAVE IGNORED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT: IT WAS RELEVANT AND ADDRESSED THE CENTRAL ISSUE
We are looking at a case where, on appeal, the judge found that a Deputy Master fell into error by failing to take into account relevant expert evidence provided by a claimant. The judge held that the Master had misunderstood…
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT “STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE…”
There are numerous cases reported on this blog where judges have been critical of the “evidence” given by solicitors in witness statements. In many cases, even on cursory examination, it transpires that the lawyer is not in a position to…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW: LOOKING AT SERIES 2: AND WHY THIS APPLIES TO ALL LITIGATORS… (INCLUDING THAT REGULAR MISSIVE THAT YOU SHOULD NOT THREATEN YOUR OPPONENT WITH A PROCTOLOGY EXAMINATION..)
I will soon be starting a new series on “Advocacy – the Judge’s view”. This draws on the principle that whilst judges are the advocate’s clients they are their “consumers” so to speak. Before that it is useful to remind…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE CASE WHERE THE GOVERNMENT’S WITNESS EVIDENCE WAS SO BAD THAT IT WITHDREW THE CASE BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS GAVE EVIDENCE: WHY THE PRINCIPLES RELATING TO WITNESS EVIDENCE NEED TO BE UNDERSTOOD
Recent posts have revisited the age-old problem of witness statements being misused. They often contain argument and comment. For that reason we are revisiting the observations of Mr Justice Smith in the Farepak case farepak-judges-statement. It presents an object lesson…
EXPERT WATCH 53 (THAT CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE AGAIN): THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS MADE MISTAKES AND THEN “GAVE AN IMPRESSION OF LOFTINESS” : THE JUDGE FELT UNABLE TO RELY ON THEIR CONCLUSIONS
Here we have an example of a judge clearly rejecting the expert evidence adduced on behalf of a defendant and giving clear grounds for the criticism of them. This was in the context of a case where the defendant had…
PROVING THINGS 293: THE CLAIMANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: THE JUDGE DID NOT DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES -AND THIS WAS A SUBMISSION THAT PUT THE DEFENDANT IN SOME JEOPARDY…
This is an interesting case on clinical negligence where judgment was given today. It warrants (and will receive) several posts. Here we look at the trial judge’s rejection of the argument that adverse inferences should be drawn when the claimant…
EXPERT WATCH 52: A REMINDER THAT THE JUDGE REMAINS THE SOLE FINDER OF FACT: (HOWEVER THIS A CASE WHERE THE JUDGE IS HIGHLY COMPLIMENTARY ABOUT SOME OF THE EXPERTS)
Here we look at the judge’s comments on expert evidence arising from a complex case in the Commercial Court. The judgment provides a reminder that experts should not be instructed to comment on matters of fact which are the sole…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN A RULE OR AN ORDER PRESCRIBES A PAGE LIMIT TO A WITNESS STATEMENT – THEN YOU’D BETTER STICK TO IT: THE COURT IS UNLIKELY TO CONDONE “FORENSIC CHEATING”
Here we are, with no apology, looking at the same case in the earlier post again. The earlier post dealt with the issue of relief from sanction. Here I want to concentrate on the litigant’s deliberate decision to breach the…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT “DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF “BREACH NOW REPENT LATER”
Here we look at a strongly worded judgment where relief from sanctions was refused. A party had exceeded the page limit set by court directions and also served the statement late. The judge dismissed the arguments that the other side…
CHILDREN AND FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION 2026: WEBINAR 30th JUNE 2026
Fatal accident claims involving children present unique and sensitive legal challenges for practitioners. This webinar examines claims brought on behalf of children as well as claims arising from the death of a child, highlighting the procedural, evidential, and dependency issues…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: THIRTEEN YEARS OF BLOGGING (JUNE 2013): THE TEENAGE YEARS ARE STARTING…
Today we look at the posts from June 2013, that is the month that Civil Litigation Brief first started as a blog (24th June 2013). Prior to that it had been a monthly (and when the Civil Procedure Rules were…
THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON SUPERVISION 7: RECORDING ARRANGMENTS (IF IT ISN’T WRITTEN DOWN IT HASN’T HAPPENED…)
We are returning to the SRA Guidance on Effective Supervision, this time looking at the importance that is given to recording the supervision arrangements. It is clear that the SRA expects these to be written down. I have provided a…
You must be logged in to post a comment.