WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS? A REVIEW OF THE CASES
Last week I gave an in-house talk to a London firm of solicitors.* One of the matters we discussed was when (if ever) it was appropriate for a solicitor to make a witness statement in support of an interlocutory application. …
SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: A DUTY TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST AND SCRUPULOUSLY ACCURATE
There are particular dangers for solicitors giving evidence. This morning I wrote about the common (but totally wrong) practice of solicitors using witness statements to argue points of law. In Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority v Azima [2020] EWHC 1686…
WITNESS STATEMENTS “NOT IN MY STOCK IN TRADE”: HIGH COURT JUDGE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ARGUMENTATIVE AND LARGELY IRRELEVANT WITNESS STATEMENTS
Last week I wrote about the report on witness evidence working group of the business and property courts. That report commented that drafting witness statements (more accurately evidence in chief) was no longer part of a lawyer’s “stock in trade”. …
COUNSEL’S ADVICE IS NOT EVIDENCE: REALLY, ITS NOT.
There is an interesting consideration of the role of counsel’s advice in the judgment of HHJ Vincent in AZ v BZ (financial remedies appeal) [2020] EWFC 28. In a financial remedies hearing, a judge was wrong to firstly admit, and…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE TRIAL HELD REMOTELY: AND IT WORKED WELL…
I have highlighted some cases where remote hearings have had difficulties. In Jones v Ministry of Defence [2020] EWHC 1603 (QB) the judgment indicates that the remote hearing in a clinical negligence case worked well. THE CASE The case was…
WHEN THE SKY FALLS IN: WHAT TO DO WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION: WEBINAR 6th AUGUST 2020
I have been writing on this blog for some time now that lawyers should be taught that mistakes happen. We should aim to avoid them but if errors are made they are often rectifiable if dealt with correctly and quickly. …
AN EXPERT WITH A CONFLICT OF INTEREST: SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED
I am giving a webinar on the 29th June 2020 on the Perils and Pitfalls of Expert Evidence. I have not found that there is any shortage of material. That material is added to in the judgment of Mr Justice…
THE “BACK TO BASICS” SERIES 80: THE POSTS SO FAR
The “back to basics” series has been going since April 2018. It has covered a surprising amount of topics. From how to draft an application to “litigation wishful thinking”. Two years on this is a good time to recap on…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 79: NON-DISCLOSURE OF THE OTHER SIDE’S WITNESS STATEMENT
Today we are looking at CPR 32.12. The rule preventing a party using the other side’s witness statements for purposes other than the action they were served in. THE RULE Use of witness statements for other purposes 32.12 (1) Except…
OPINION EVIDENCE AND DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED AT TRIAL
In Harlow -v- Aspect Contracts Ltd [2020] EWHC 1488 (TCC) Alexander Nissen QC (sitting as a High Court judge) allowed an application preventing the defendant relying on a witness statement that was, in reality, an attempt to give expert evidence. …
EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE PERILS AND THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th JUNE 2020
The problems that experts can cause in cases (often to the side that instructed them) have been extensively catalogued on this blog over the years. On the 29th June I am giving a webinar on the perils and pitfalls of…
COVID REPEATS 40: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS IS GOING TO END BADLY: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE (& THEN 10 MORE)
This week we are looking at witness statements and the process of gathering witness evidence. In August 2015 I wrote at length about the judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Susan Saunderson & Others -v- Sonae Industria (UK) Ltd [2015] EWCA…
WHY YOU NEED TO KNOW THE RULES AND GUIDANCE IN RELATION TO SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE: A WEBINAR
In the judgment discussed earlier today in Tully v Exterion Media (UK) Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 1119 (QB), Master McCloud, made some important observations in relation to how the courts deal with surveillance evidence. As a result of that…
NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER FOR EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION GOES UP IN SMOKE…
Possibly the most difficult position you could put yourself in in litigation is for the court to make an order, do something the court did not allow, not get permission in advance, and then seek relief from sanctions thereafter. …
COVID REPEATS 37: CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERT WITNESSES: HINTS, TIPS AND LINKS
The impartiality, or otherwise, of expert witness witnesses was in the news in June 2014. Since expert evidence has been a constant theme on this blog. This would seem an appropriate time to revisit a post about the cross-examination of…
COVID REPEATS 36: DEFENDANT’S EXPERT TOLD TO GET ON HIS BIKE: WHEN A PARTY “WISELY” PLACES NO RELIANCE ON THEIR OWN EXPERT IN CLOSING SUBMISSIONS
Today we are looking again at the judgment of Mrs Justice Cox in Sinclair -v- Joyner [2015] EWHC Civ 1800 (QB). Some important observations about the role of the expert and the conduct of the expert instructed by the defendant…
WITNESS STATEMENTS FULL OF VITRIOL – THIS IS NEVER GOING TO END WELL…
The “Covid Repeats” series next week will revisit some of those (many) cases where judges have found witness statements to be inadequate. The inclusion of unnecessary matters in witness statements is a continuing issue. It can be seen in the…
COVID REPEATS 34: EXPERTS, YACHTS AND THAT SINKING FEELING WHEN A CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF
Today we are looking back at the case of Hirtenstein -v- Hill Dickinson LLP [2014] EWHC 2711 (Comm) contains many interesting lessons for those involved in professional negligence litigation in particular. Here I just want to concentrate upon two:…
AFFIDAVITS, COMPULSION, EXHIBITS AND THE IMPLIED DUTY NOT TO DISCLOSE TO THIRD PARTIES: HIGH COURT DECISION
I am grateful to barrister Sarah Walker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Deputy Insolvencies and Companies Court Judge Kyriakides in the Official Receiver -v- Skeene & Bowers [2020] EWHC 1252. It concerned the issue of whether…
COVID REPEATS 29: “THERE IS NO PRIMER FOR SCUTTLERS”: THE JUDGE’S ASSESSMENT OF EVIDENCE WHERE (HE FOUND) THAT A SHIP WAS SUNK DELIBERATELY
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Teare in Kairos Shipping Ltd -v- The Standard Club Europe Ltd [2016] EWHC 2412 (Admlty) is a comprehensive lesson in thorough fact finding. “There is no primer or guide to…