PROVING THINGS 203: EVIDENCE AND SCOTT SCHEDULES IN COERCIVE CONTROL CASES: SCOTT SCHEDULES “INEFFECTIVE AND FREQUENTLY UNSUITABLE”
In F v M [2021] EWFC 4 Mr Justice Hayden considered issues relating to fact finding in a case of “coercive control”. Although the difficulties here are in the context of a family case, the issues will have some relevance…
ANOTHER WITNESS STATEMENT THAT STRAYED INTO INADMISSIBLE ARGUMENTS, PROTRACTED COMMENTARY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE
There have been a number of recent cases regarding the appropriate drafting of witness statements, in particular attempts to put much inadmissible material into statements. This can be seen in the judgment of HH Russen QC in Philipp v Barclays…
PROVING THINGS 201: THE WHITE LION HOTEL CASE AND PROVING BREACH OF DUTY BY AN OCCUPIER
In the judgment in The White Lion Hotel (A Partnership) v James [2021] EWCA Civ 31 the Court of Appeal set out some importance principles in relation to claims based on the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. The court upheld a…
PROVING THINGS 200: ALL THE SERIES IN ONE PLACE: THE (VERY) EXPENSIVE COSTS OF FAILING TO THINK FULLY ABOUT EVIDENCE
There are now 200 posts in the “Proving Things” Series. These centre, usually, on a failure to establish matters at trial. Sometimes the failures are dramatic. In Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2017] EWHC 300 (Comm) i the claimants had…
CLAIMANT NOT SUCCESSFUL IN APPLICATION THAT A WITNESS ATTEND IN PERSON AND NOT REMOTELY
In Langley v GMB & Ors [2020] EWHC 3619 (QB) Mrs Justice Stacy refused a claimant’s application for an order that a defendant’s witness attend court personally. The matter could proceed fairly with the witness attending remotely. This judgment (given…
“HIS WITNESS STATEMENT … CONTAINED A GREAT DEAL OF ANALYSIS, SUBMISSION AND COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS”
Because of the imminent changes in the rules in the Business and Property courts it is an opportune time to see how often the basic principles of witness evidence are not being observed. We see this in the judgment in YJB…
PROVING THINGS 198: “NOT RELIABLE EVIDENCE”: THOSE EMAILS MAY NOT BE ALL THEY SEEM
In Richards v Harvey [2021] EWHC 21 (Ch) HHJ Cooke, doubted the authenticity of emails relied upon by the claimant. It is a reminder of the importance of a notice to prove. “This document is not reliable evidence of…
PROVING THINGS 197: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS IN A PANDEMIC: ACTUAL EARNINGS EXCEEDED POTENTIAL EARNINGS
Sicri v Associated Newspapers Ltd (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 3541 (QB) is an unusual case in many ways. There are issues that are sensitive and require careful consideration. However there are also observations about claiming loss of earnings and proving…
A WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO ARGUE THE CASE: YET ANOTHER JUDICIAL REMINDER
In Ceviz v Frawley & Anor [2021] EWHC 8 (Ch) HHJ Keyser QC made observations about a witness statement. This case highlights the need for practitioners to be aware of the limitations of witness statement. If this kind of statement…
IT IS UNLAWFUL TO TAKE PHOTOGRAPHS OF A TRIAL CONDUCTED REMOTELY
In SLF Associates Inc v (1) HSBC (UK) Bank Plc & Ors [2021] EWHC 5 (Ch) Master Kaye pointed out that taking photographs of participants in a remote court was unlawful. THE CASE The Master was giving judgment in a…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUNDUP – DECEMBER 2020
A round up of posts and articles relating to civil procedure from November 2020. COSTS ACL – Definition of proportionality to be expanded to include vulnerability ACL – High Court upholds assessment of success fee in high-value clinical negligence case ACL – Supreme…
REVIEW OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN 2020 III : SOME FACTS AND FIGURES: POPULAR BLOG POSTS, VISITOR NUMBERS AND SEARCH TERMS
Needless to say this has been an unusual year for litigators. It is always interesting to review what have been the most popular posts on this blog and look at some facts and figures. Can we tell anything about the…
STRAIGHTFORWARD LANGUAGE IS BEST: MISSIVE FROM THE BENCH: LAYWYERS MAY HAVE IMPROVED OVER TIME – OTHERS HAVE NOT
In Secretary of State for Business Energy And Industrial Strategy v Evans & Anor [2020] EWHC 3519 (Ch) (18 December 2020) Deputy Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Baister had something to say about the absence of plain language in the…
EXPERTS NOT REALLY NECESSARY WHEN A JUDGE LOOKS AT BALLET SHOES: EVIDENCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE EN POINTE
Instructing experts in circumstances where they are not necessary, or their evidence is not admissible, is a common theme in litigation. This issue was considered by Mr David Stone (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Rothy’s Inc v…
A SERIES OF WEBINARS ON “STAYING SAFE” IN PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE: BRIGHTEN UP YOUR NEW YEAR
To help 2021 run smoothly for our members I am presenting a series of webinars in February and March on the theme of “staying safe” in the running of personal injury cases. The webinars look at key areas of practice…
PROVING THINGS 190: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (1) : THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT: THE QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK
The basic task of proving damages, particularly elements such as loss of earnings and disability in the labour market, are often overlooked in witness statements prepared for trial, both in personal injury actions and other actions were loss of income…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT REQUIRE TRANSLATION OR WHERE THE MAKER IS NOT LITERATE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES IS NOT SIMPLY A “TECHNICAL BREACH”
In Diamond v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWHC 3313 Mr Justice Calver considered the weight to be attached to witness statements that did not comply with the Civil Procedure Rules. The case shows why everyone should…
JUDGE REFUSES TO RECONSIDER CRITICISMS OF EXPERT WITNESS IN A JUDGMENT: EXPERT DUTIES CANNOT BE DELEGATED
In Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd & Anor v Generics UK Ltd (t\a MYLAN) [2020] EWHC 3270 (Pat) Mr Justice Marcus Smith made some observations about the role of the expert witness and the importance of their evidence being criticised in…
“SADLY, THIS IS AN ALL-TOO-COMMON FAILURE IN WITNESS STATMENTS PROVIDED IN CIVIL LITIGATION”
The comments of Mr Justice Murray today in Guest Supplies Intl Ltd v South Place Hotel Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 3307 (QB) repeat what has been mentioned numerous times on this blog. “It will perhaps be seen from…
A BARRISTER OF “GOOD JUDGEMENT”: WHEN THE PERSON WHO USUALLY DOES THE CROSS-EXAMINING IS IN THE WITNESS BOX
The judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Torrance v Bradberry [2020] EWHC 3260 (QB) is one that should be read by every practising lawyer. It is a case of a lawyer as defendant, being accused of negligence in their conduct…
