BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?
In civil proceedings witnesses are commonly present throughout an entire action. On occasions a request is made that witnesses be excluded. There is little authority for the proposition that a court can exclude witnesses or guidance as to how the…
THERE MAY BE A LOT OF LAWYERS REPRESENTING A PARTY: HOWEVER THE CLAIM WAS STILL PRESENTED IN AN “UNFOCUSED” MANNER: A “MOVEABLE FEAST” IS NOT A WISE WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION
It is not that common for a judge to comment that a claim has been brought in an “unfocused manner”. It is even less common in a case where the case is heavily “lawyered”. We have an example here. The…
CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
A post yesterday highlighted both the significance of a claim for loss of earnings for a child claimant, but also the difficulty. In that case the award for disability in the labour market of £50,000 was higher than the award…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
Here we look at at post from twelve years ago concerning judicial protestations about opinion evidence in witness statements. Despite all the warnings have occurred since, and the advent of PD57AC, this remains a regular (and improper) occurrence. We looked…
PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
Assessing claims for loss of earnings for children is always difficult. The importance of this has become, if anything, more acute given the Supreme Court decision in CCC (by her mother and litigation friend MMM) (Appellant) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals…
“OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS
We have seen many cases where the courts have been critical of a party’s failure to comply with the duties of full and frank disclosure when obtaining an order without notice. However here we have a case where the judge…
MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
The Revised Law Society Guidance on Mazur was looked at in a previous post. Whilst we wait for the SRA Guidance it may be useful to look at the key differences in the Law Society Guidance before and after the…
PROVING THINGS 286: THE CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE: YOU LOST US $715 MILLION IN TWO YEARS BUT THAT WAS BECAUSE YOU DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE BUSINESS YOU WERE BUYING
Here we have a case where the claimant lost a lot of money ($715 million) in a short amount of time (two years) but failed in its attempt to show that this was due to the fault of the defendants….
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 66: WHEN THE CLAIMANT TRIES TO ADVANCE ALLEGATIONS NOT STATED IN THE STATEMENT OF CASE THOSE MATTERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE JUDGE
This case illustrates the need for allegations to be pleaded, particularly in relation to assertions of fraud. It took 38 days of court time and concerned a loss of US $715 million. Still the judge was concerned that allegations were…
“GUIDE, MENTOR AND FRIEND”: REVIEW OF THE APIL GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS 4th EDITION: STUART McKECHNIE KC (AND A FORMIDABLE TEAM): THE “LITTLE GEM” THAT KEEPS ON GIVING
The fundamental question for a reviewer of a legal text is – is this book worthwhile? Here there is only one answer. A book of considerable importance, assistance and utility is a “must buy”. HOW DO I SUMMARISE THIS? Sir…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE COMMERCIAL COURT REPORT AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: PD57AC WAS FIVE YEARS OLD THIS MONTH – STILL GUIDANCE IS NEEDED
The Business and Property Courts – The Commercial Court Report 2024-2025 makes interesting reading. It notes that PD57AC came into force some five years ago. It still shows the need to emphasise that the Practice Direction needs to be complied…
CIVIL EVIDENCE: “BARE ASSERTIONS” ARE INSUFFICIENT TO ESTABLISH A DISPUTED DEBT NOR WILL “VAGUE AND UNPARTICULARISED” EVIDENCE
This case serves as a reminder that, if a debt is to be disputed, then the evidence in support of the denial has to be particularised and credible. Here the respondents faced a debt of £920,000. There was an attempt…
A REMINDER – DOCUMENTS IN AN AGREED BUNDLE ARE ADMISSIBLE AT THE HEARING AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR CONTENTS.
We are just looking at a few lines from a judgment we looked at earlier this morning. They contain a reminder that documents in an agreed bundle are admissible as evidence at the hearing. However this does not mean that…
AN “EXTERNAL” REPORT IS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUES IN THE CASE BUT THE JUDGE WILL DETERMINE ALL KEY MATTERS THEMSELVES..
We have, for many years now, been looking at the way in which the courts consider the admissibility of reports prepared for related purposes. We have that issue considered in this case. A report was obtained in relation to allegations…
THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE AS THE DEFENDANT ASSERTED: THE SCCO REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE
This is an interesting judgement on two levels. Firstly the judge did not accept the defendant’s contention that there had been an agreement to extend time for service of Points of Dispute to a bill of costs. Secondly, applying the…
AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
Drafting a Schedule of Damages is not simply a mathematical calculation. It requires legal knowledge, careful analysis, attention to evidence, and practical judgement. Courts frequently criticise poorly prepared schedules, particularly where figures are unsupported, exaggerated, or inconsistent with the evidence….
WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
In this case a wasted costs order was made against a firm of solicitors for breach of warranty of authority. The stated to the defendant and the court, and believed, that they were instructed by the claimant’s insurers when, in…
SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
For many years now we have been looking at the interaction between an application to set aside a default judgment and the “Denton” criteria. Here we look at another case where the court considered relief from sanctions in this context. …
THE JUDGE FOUND AGAINST ME BECAUSE THEY GAVE TOO MUCH LEEWAY TO A LITIGANT IN PERSON : ALLEGATIONS OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE PARTICULARISED (AND CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT)
Here we consider some unusual grounds of appeal. An unsuccessful claimant appealed on the grounds, inter alia, that the judge had erred in giving leeway to the defendant who was a litigant in person. What is important here is that…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: BOTH WITNESSES ARE HONEST AND BELIEVE THEY ARE TELLING THE TRUTH – BUT ONE IS WRONG…
It is often the case that the most difficult cases are those that depend almost wholly on witness recollection. This is made far more difficult in a case such as a motor accident where the incident happened in a matter…
MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 59: UNQUALIFIED PERSON NOT ALLOWED TO REPRESENT PARKING COMPANY AT A SMALL CLAIMS HEARING
I am grateful to Ritchie Young for sending me a copy of this judgment in which the District Judge refused to allow an unauthorised person a right of audience in a small claims track case. It is not technically part…
MAZUR MATTERS 58: LEARN HOW TO SUPERVISE STAFF PROPERLY – OR RISK GOING TO JAIL: IT IS WISE TO RECORD SUPERVISION ARRANGEMENTS FULLY
One key element of the Mazur decision, that needs repeating, is that it does not allow unauthorised persons to “conduct” litigation. It allows unauthorised people to assist and conduct the tasks involved in litigation so long as they are properly…
MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS: (THIS IS NOT “AS YOU WERE”): WEBINAR 9th APRIL 2026
I have already written about the misunderstandings that have occurred in relation to the Mazur judgment. The judgment is far more nuanced than some commentators suggest and a detailed knowledge of what is required is essential for anyone involved in…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: COURT STRIKES OUT PARTS OF DEFENDANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT AS NON COMPLIANT WITH PD57AC (AND THE DEFENDANT IS A BARRISTER…)
This case adds to the growing number of cases where the courts have considered whether a witness statement breaches PD 57AC and the consequences for breach. The defendant’s initial statement contained numerous breaches of PD57. A revised statement was more…
THE MAZUR DECISION TODAY 3: NO DEFINITIVE DEFINITION OF THE CONDUCT OF LITIGATION: BUT WE DO HAVE THE “MAGNIFICENT SEVEN”
We continue our look at the judgment today by looking at the court’s more detailed consideration of what was meant by the “conduct of litigation”. The court did not give a definition. However it did give seven key points as to…
PROVING THINGS 285: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: “IT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH QOCS TO EXTEND IT TO CLAIMANTS WHO KNOWINGLY TELL UNTRUTHS ABOUT SOMETHING FUNDAMENTAL TO THEIR CLAIM…”
This is a judgment on fundamental dishonesty where the judge considers, in some detail, the burden of proof and what a defendant needs to establish. There are important observations about the burden of proof and consideration of the term “dishonesty”…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 65: THE REASON WHY PLEADINGS ARE IMPORTANT IN ALL TYPES OF CASES: “IF THE DEFENDANT FEELS SHE HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH ANY PART OF HER CASE BY REASON OF INADEQUATE PLEADINGS … SHE MAY NEED TO TAKE THAT UP WITH HER SOLICITORS…”
I appreciate that today has been a “pleadings heavy” day on this site. However the reason for this is that pleadings are important across the board. Earlier today we looked at pleadings in a multi-million pound dispute between two banks. Here…
MASTERING PD57AC – GETTING WITNESS STATEMENTS RIGHT IN THE COMMERCIAL COURTS (AND THE CONSEQUENCES IF YOU DON’T): WEBINAR 30th APRIL 2026
Witness statements can make—or break—your case in the Commercial Courts. Since the introduction of Practice Direction 57AC in April 2021, the courts have repeatedly emphasised that compliance is not optional. Yet many practitioners continue to fall into the same costly…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: A MANDATORY OBLIGATION OFTEN IGNORED
It is surprisingly common to see witness statements that fail to comply with the basic – and mandatory – requirement that the maker of the statement gives the source of any matters of information or belief they are giving evidence…
HOW A FIRM OF SOLICITORS SHOULD NOT CONDUCT THEMSELVES IN LITIGATION: A WORKING EXAMPLE: EVIDENCE THAT WAS “GENERALLY UNRRELIABLE” AND “LACKING IN CREDIBILITY”
Here we are looking at a judgment that contains some remarkable observations and findings about the conduct of a solicitor. The judge was concerned not only about the failure to comply with directions, the inadequate nature of the statement of…
PROVING THINGS 284: APPLICANT FOR INJUNCTION FAILS ON JUST ABOUT EVERY POINT: THE CASE WAS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND; NO EVIDENCE OF A RISK OF DISSIPATION; MATTERS THAT LEAVE THE JUDGE “BAFFLED” AND UNCOMFORTABLE
The applicant in this case sought an injunction. The application was (unusually) made on notice. The respondent did not have the opportunity to put in evidence. The applicant failed on just about every point. It was unclear what the applicant’s…
THROWBACK FRIDAY: MAKING A MISTAKE AND THEN BIGGING A DEEPER HOLE FOR YOURSELF: MARCH 2018
Here we are looking at a set of circumstances that we have seen many time, both before and after this post from March 2018. A lawyer makes a mistake, panics and then makes horrendous decisions in an attempt to cover…
EXPERT WATCH 42: THIS IS NOT EXPERT EVIDENCE – BUT A SIMPLE STEP UP FROM “NUMBER CRUNCHING” : ALSO OPINION EVIDENCE SHOULD BE DISTINGUISHED FROM FACTUAL EVIDENCE
Here we have a case where the judge found evidence provided by experts to be of “assistance” but where he was clear in his view that the information put forward was not expert evidence. The evidence was “simply a kind…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: MAKING ASSERTIONS WITH NO CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE LEADS TO APPLICATION BEING REJECTED: THE EVIDENCE WAS SO “UNSPECIFIC” THAT IT FAILED TO PROVE THE APPLICANT’S CONCERNS
Here we look at the judge’s assessment of the evidence produced in support of an application that details of the applicant should not be disclosed. The judge held that the evidence was “unspecific” and was not corroborated. There was a…
COURT ORDER PREVENTS CLAIMANTS FROM SENDING COURT DOCUMENTS TO CERTAIN PARTIES: THE CLAIMANT’S CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ABUSE OF PROCESS OF THE COURT: THE DEROGATION FROM THE OPEN JUSTICE PRINCIPLE IS JUSTIFIED
Here we have an unusual order under CPR 31.22 (2) made in unusual circumstances. The claimant was precented from sending documents disclosed to in proceedings, and mentioned in open court, to various specified entities. It is a reminder of the…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 61: CLAIM FOR LIBEL WAS NOT PROPERLY PLEADED: “MUCH OF THIS ESSENTIAL DETAIL IS MISSING”
As we shall see there are very strict and precise requirements for pleading libel. There are numerous cases where the claimant has failed to get past the preliminary stages because of inadequate pleadings. We look at such a case here….
HALLUCINATIONS KEEP APPEARING IN THE REPORTS: TWO MORE EXAMPLES: COUNSEL AT FAULT IN BOTH…
We are looking at two more examples of “hallucinated” cases appearing in reported cases. In both cases it was counsel that was presenting the case. (In one case counsel was acting for himself). “The incident does, however, demonstrate vividly the…
PROVING THINGS 283: FAILING TO ESTABLISH A CLAIM FOR PROVISIONAL DAMAGES FOR ONE SET OF SYMPTOMS BUT ESTABLISHING IT IN ANOTHER
There are relatively few judgments in which the law and practice relating to provisional damages are considered in detail. We have such a case here. Further it is an example of the claimant failing to establish provisional damages in relation…
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE NEED TO SERVE A NOTICE DISPUTING THE AUTHENTICITY OF A DOCUMENT: CPR 32.19
Here we look at a case that illustrates a very basic principle of civil procedure and evidence. It is a case where the claimant was, in essence, disputing the authenticity of several documents. However a basic procedural step had not…
NEW EDITION OF THE KING’S BENCH GUIDE: WHERE TO FIND IT AND THE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
A new edition of the King’s Bench Guide has been published. There are many useful points for litigators, in particular using CE-FILE, the new email addresses and some corrected links. “The Guide does not have the status of a Practice…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: A STATEMENT THAT WAS “BASED ON A COMBINATION OF SPECULATION AND DOUBLE, TRIPLE OR EVEN MORE REMOTE HEARSAY”
We have looked at many cases in which judges have been critical of the way in which witness statements are drafted. This case is one of the most clear and extreme examples. The defendant (a firm of solicitors) failed to…
PROVING THINGS 282: THE INJURED CLAIMANT ADDUCED NO EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE (SOMETHING ABOUT PLEADINGS TOO…)
Here we look at a Privy Council decision in a personal injury case. The claimant lost at first instance, the defendant having elected to call no evidence. What is interesting about this case is the constant motif in the judgment…
EXPERT WATCH 41: THE COURT OF APPEAL REFUSES TO OVERTURN A DECISION WHERE THE “WRONG” TYPE OF JOINT EXPERT WAS INSTRUCTED
This is an unusual case where, after the event, a party to the litigation argued that the court had relied on the “wrong” type of expert evidence. An educational psychologist had been instructed as a joint expert whereas what was…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 6: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION: STATISTICAL RISK REDUCTION DOES NOT SATISFY THE BURDEN OF PROOF
Establishing causation is a key element of many clinical negligence cases. Here we have a case where the issue of causation was put in two ways: the “but for” test and alternatively the “indivisible injury” test. The claimant did not…
EXPERT WATCH 40: THE TRIAL JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EVIDENCE OF THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED WITNESS: “THE DUTY OF THE COURT IS TO APPLY THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND TO FIND THE FACTS HAVING REGARD TO ALL THE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE…”
This is a case where the judge did not accept the views of a jointly instructed expert as to the authenticity of a document that was central to the case. The expert did not have access to all the relevant…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED AFTER CLAIMANT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH PEREMPTORY ORDER FOR DISCLOSURE: “THE CONSEQUENCE IS THAT THE PROCEEDINGS ARE STRUCK OUT”
Here we look at the “second half” of the decision considered in the previous post. Having rejected the claimant’s submissions that breaches of a peremptory order should be considered under CPR 3.10 the judge then went on to consider the…
COST BITES 362: WHETHER A BREAKDOWN SHOULD BE PROVIDED ON A DISBURSEMENT: READ THE JUDGMENT
An earlier post related to this case which deals with the question of whether a party should provide a breakdown of an invoice from a translator. Ben Williams KC has kindly provided me with a copy of the judgment. “In my judgment,…
APPLICATION TO ADDUCE NEW WITNESS STATEMENT ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE TRIAL: DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLIED
A party who serves a witness statement late always has problems. A litigant who tries to introduce a new witness on the morning of the trial has major problems. We have such an application here. Unsurprisingly it did not fare…
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A CLIENT BLAMES THEIR SOLICITOR FOR ISSUES IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT: SOME EXAMPLES CONSIDERED
Occasionally I give in-house presentations on drafting witness statements. I always emphasise the importance of protecting the client from over-enthusiastic drafting by their lawyer to make sure that the witness statement is accurate and compliant. I then ask what steps…
WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 29th APRIL 2026
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Attersley v UK Insurance Ltd has sharpened the costs risks faced by claimants who accept a Part 36 offer outside the relevant period. While a claimant who accepts late remains subject to fixed recoverable costs…
You must be logged in to post a comment.