PROMOTING THE ART AND SCIENCE OF THE HUMBLE COURT BUNDLE: A “LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE”: WEBINAR 4th DECEMBER 2024
The problems that courts have with bundles have always been a prominent part of this blog. A post about bundles, “Sedley’s Laws” and how to prepare a bundle was the most read post on the blog for four years. However…
THIS IS NOT EXPERT OPINION BUT “ARGUMENTS” SAYS THE JUDGE: PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT NOT GIVEN
In Norman v N & CJ Horton Property [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch) Master Clark found that proposed “expert evidence” was not evidence at all but simply opinions. The person preparing the report was not allowed to give expert evidence on…
PROVING THINGS 251: TRIAL JUDGE FINDS THAT DEFENDANT’S LETTER WAS NOT WRITTEN CONTEMPORANEOUSLY AND CONCOCTED IN AN ATTEMPT TO EXCULPATE
The judgment of HHJ Berkley in Melia & Anor v Tamlyn And Son ltd [2024] EWHC 3002 (Ch) has a number of interesting aspects in relation to the assessment of evidence. One of those things is the judge’s rejection of…
COST BITES 198: YET ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL REPORT/AGENCY FEE SAGA: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF THE BILL
Hot on the heels of publishing the previous post in relation to the judge’s refusal to order a breakdown of the agency fees involved in a medical report I received a copy of a case from Ben Millns of Kennedys. …
COST BITES 197: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL REPORT/AGENCY FEE SAGA: IT WAS NOT PROPORTIONAL TO ORDER A BREAKDOWN OF THE FEE
I am grateful to Brian Dempsey of BD Costs for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Iyer in the case of Craven -v- Henley, a copy of which is available here Craven -v- Henley. It is a decision…
CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION FOR AN ANONYMITY ORDER REFUSED: THE APPLICATION WAS TOO LATE: IMPORTANT ISSUES CONSIDERED BY THE HIGH COURT
I am grateful to barrister Leslie Keegan for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Nicklin in PMC -v- A Local Health Board [2024] EWHC 2969 (KB). It deals with important issues relating to the making of…
PROVING THINGS 250: SOLICITOR FAILS TO PROVE THAT FORMER CLIENT WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ONLINE REVIEWS
In Samuels t/a Samuels & Co Solicitors v Henry [2024] EWHC 2898 (KB) Deputy Master Marzec found that the claimant failed to prove that the defendant was responsible for adverse online reviews. He also rejected the claimant’s application that the…
LIMITATION, DEFAULT AND SANCTIONS – THE KEY CASES OF 2024: WEBINAR 27th NOVEMBER 2024: HELPING YOU TO AVOID PROBLEMS IN 2O25 (AND BEYOND…)
This webinar looks at the key cases relating to limitation, default and sanctions that have occurred in 2024. The aim is to look at problem areas to help litigators avoid problems in the future. Booking details are available here. THE…
THE DUTY TO PUT YOUR CASE TO A WITNESS AT TRIAL: NOT AN ABSOLUTE RULE: POSITION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
In Wigglesworth v Beetson [2024] EWHC 2886 (Ch) HHJ Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered arguments that a failure to expressly challenge markings on a plan used by a witness meant that the evidence had to be accepted….
DRAFTING EFFECTIVE ATTENDANCE NOTES IN CIVIL LITIGATION: PROTECT, SURVIVE AND THRIVE: WEBINAR 18th NOVEMBER 2024
Attendance notes form a major part of a litigator’s armoury. They are important in keeping a record of what happened and what was said and in protecting the lawyer if disputes later arise. They play a crucial role when costs…
EXPERTS, NEW EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DOUBT THE RELIABILITY OF AN EXPERT REPORT
The Court of Appeal decision in T (Fresh Evidence on Appeal) [2024] EWCA Civ 1384 is an appeal in a family court case. It contains important observations in relation to attempts to adduce new evidence at the appeal stage. Equally…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW 7: WITNESS STATEMENTS “ACCURACY AND NOT LEGAL ARGUMENT IS THE KEY TO ENSURING A WITNESS STATEMENT IS AS EFFECTIVE AS IT CAN BE”
In terms of preparation of client’s case, and prospects of success, witness statements are crucial. The rules only allow the witness to give additional evidence in exceptional circumstances. Many cases that go to trial are, in essence, about the credibility…
THE MAN ON THE CLAPHAM OMNIBUS – WHICH IS NOT A GOOD PLACE TO BE WHEN GIVING EVIDENCE AT A REMOTE HEARING
In Raja & Anor v ATM Law & Ors [2024] EWHC 2782 (Ch) the witnesses gave evidence (or attempted to give evidence) from inappropriate places, including a bus. The judgment of Master Clark shows the need to follow the correct…
PROVING THINGS 249: CYCLIST FAILS TO PROVE THAT A DEFECTIVE KERBSTONE WAS THE CAUSE OF AN ACCIDENT: BETTER PHOTOGRAPHS WOULD HELP
In Robertson v Cornwall Council [2024] EWHC 2830 (KB) Mr Justice Linden dismissed an appeal in a case where the claimant had failed to establish liability at trial. The trial judge had found that the claimant had not established the…
DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH A WHOLE HOST OF ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY:
In Cullen v Henniker-Major [2024] EWHC 2809 (KB) HHJ Ambrose (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) rejected the numerous allegations of fundamental dishonesty made by the defendant against the claimant. The case may be an object lesson in…
BUNDLES PREPARED IN A CHAOTIC MANNER: CHRONOLOGICAL IS BEST: COMMENTS FROM THE HIGH COURT
There are over a hundred posts on this blog about the subject of bundles. Problems occur everywhere, from the Supreme Court to the Employment Tribunal. We see another example in the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Mok v Fitzmaurice…
LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: THE FUNDAMENTALS: WEBINAR 11th NOVEMBER 2024
We have seen some interesting cases on loss of earnings claims this year, with a claimant being found fundamentally dishonest, because of the way the claim for loss earnings was presented, an “unreliable” schedule leading to a claim for loss…
MENTIONING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MEETINGS IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: PART OF THE WITNESS STATEMENTS WERE STRUCK OUT
In Bond & Anor v Webster & Ors [2024] EWHC 989 (Ch) Master Bowles (sitting in retirement) granted an application to strike out parts of a witness statement that referred to an offer made at a without prejudice meeting. The…
PROVING THINGS 248: CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH ANY CASE AS TO CAUSATION IN A NEGLIGENCE CASE AGAINST SOLICITORS
In Blower v GH Canfields LLP [2024] EWHC 2763 (Ch) HHJ Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected a claimant’s case on negligence against a firm of solicitors who had reached a settlement of an action against her and…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW 5: TO PERSUADE A JUDGE THINK LIKE A JUDGE: TO THE JUDGE YOUR CASE IS A PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED
This series continues the recap of the views from judges around the world and the advice they give to advocates. Here we look at the article from J. Frederic Voros, jr for the Utah State Bar: To Persuade a Judge,…
WHEN THE CLAIMANT HAS TO CHANGE JOBS, EARNS MORE THAN BEFORE – BUT THERE IS A SUBSTANTIAL AWARD FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE VERY REAL VALUE OF “FRINGE BENEFITS”
A webinar on the 5th November looks at loss of earnings from the point of view of loss of benefits and pension claims. It is important that the very real value of “fringe” benefits is not overlooked when looking at…
PROVING THINGS 247: APPLYING A DIFFERENT MULTIPLIER TO THE RESIDUAL EARNING CAPACITY OF A DISABLED CLAIMANT
It is worthwhile highlighting one aspect of the judgment of Neil Moody KC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Winterbotham v Shahrak [2024] EWHC 2633 (KB), looked at in the previous post. The judge applied different multipliers to the claim. A…
PROVING THINGS 246: THE SELF EMPLOYED CLAIMANT AND LOSS OF EARNINGS: HIGH COURT DECISION
There are many difficult issues facing a self-employed claimant making a claim for loss of earnings. This issue was considered by Neil Moody KC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Winterbotham v Shahrak [2024] EWHC 2633 (KB). …
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW III: PREPARE PROPERLY AND SEE THE SCENE FOR YOURSELF: A VIEW FROM CANADA
As part of the repeated series looking at the advice that judges give to advocates (and how this relates to civil litigators in particular) we return to Canada. Judge Carol Baird Ellan collected the views of 12 of her colleagues…
ANOTHER WITNESS STATEMENT THAT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULES: THE CLAIMANT’S STATEMENT WAS “PARTICULARLY UNHELPFUL” AND LARGE IGNORED
In Burns v Bridge & Anor [2024] EWHC 2620 (Ch) HHK Cawson KC, sitting as a High Court Judge, observed that the claimant’s witness statement did not comply with PD 57AC. The witness statement was, to all and intents and…
ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW: A REPEAT ii: “USEFUL, JUST & CHEAP”: GUIDANCE FROM AUSTRALIA
The post I repeated yesterday on Things Lawyers do to Annoy Judges was, without doubt, when first written one of the most publicised and read posts on this blog. I think it was that post that led to the blog…
THINGS THAT LAWYERS DO TO ANNOY JUDGES: THE START OF A SERIES OF “REPEATS” (1)
Regular readers of this blog will be familiar with the judgment of Mr Justice Joseph W. Quinn He has been blunt in his assessment of witness credibility in some reported cases. He is equally blunt in his assessment of lawyers…
WHEN AN EXPERT TRIED TO USE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR CALCULATIONS: COPILOT DOESN’T PREVENT THE EVIDENCE CRASHING…
We have considered the dangers of attempting to use artificial intelligence in litigation before. The use of artificial intelligence in an expert report was considered b Schopf.S in the Surrogate’s Court, Saratoga County, in the “Matter of Weber”. “The mere…
RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE “WEIGHT” (OR ABSENCE OF WEIGHT) TO BE GIVEN TO THOSE STATEMENTS
In Oliver v Duffy [2024] EWHC 2590 Mrs Justice Hill considered an application for relief from sanction in a case where witnesses had not attended trial. The judge granted relief from sanctions but went on to hold that those statements…
THE DIFFICULT ISSUE OF THE CHILD CLAIMANT AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 14th OCTOBER 2024
For many years now I have been researching and writing about the particular problems that face practitioners when they are dealing with a claim by a child who could suffer loss of earnings in the future as a result of…
EXPERTS CAN BE ASKED TO GIVE AN OPINION ON MATTERS OF FACT, EVEN WHEN THOSE FACTS ARE ULTIMATELY FOR THE COURT
There is a short passage in the judgment of Master Davison in The Owners of the “Christos Theo” v The Owners of the “Aliki” [2024] EWHC 2106 (Admlty) which deals with an issue rarely considered by the courts – how…
PROVING THINGS 245: A FAILURE TO PROVE A LOSS OF EARNINGS: A CLAIM PUT AT OVER £2 MILLION AND £23,000 AWARDED
In McInerney v Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust (Victimisation) [2024] EAT 158 HHJ James Tayler (in the Employment Appeal Tribunal) dismissed the claimant’s appeal in relation to loss of earnings. The Employment Tribunal had found that the claimant had failed…
SOLICITORS, SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE DUTY TO THE COURT: THREE CASES REVIEWED
The judgment in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports & Anor (Re Wasted Costs Order) [2024] EWHC 2415 (KB) we looked at last week contained some important observations about the limit of a solicitor’s duty to check their own client’s social media…
SPECIAL MEASURES IN A CIVIL CASE: AN EXAMPLE OF HOW IT WORKS
Taking special measures to protect witnesses is a well known feature in the family and criminal courts. They are less well known in the civil courts. An example can be seen in the judgment of Deputy Master Marzec in IMX…
AN EXPERT SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED HIS INITIAL ASSESSMENT TO BE “CORRUPTED” BY INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE: “THERE SHOULD BE SOME INTROSPECTION ON THE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT LEGAL DEPARTMENT ABOUT THIS”
We are returning once again to the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB).We are also returning to the question of expert evidence. There…
BACK TO THE CASE OF WILSON: THIS TIME THE “CHERRY PICKING” EXPERT WHO VEERED INTO A PARTISAN APPROACH
We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB) and staying with the theme of expert witnesses whose evidence was found wanting. (This…
WHEN AN EXPERT HAS “LOST ALL INDEPENDENCE AND OBJECTIVITY” – AND ADMITS SO IN COURT
There are many interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB). Here I want to concentrate upon the judgment relating to…
AN “UNRELIABLE” SCHEDULE LEADS TO A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS BEING STRUCK OUT (AND FOUR WEBINARS ON LOSS OF EARNINGS)
The way in which a claim for loss of earnings claim is presented is of crucial importance in most claims for damages. There are a series of four seminars below where many of the essential elements are considered. A case…
DON’T DISCLOSE COUNSEL’S ADVICE TO THE OTHER SIDE: A REPEAT IN RELATION TO AN ISSUE THAT IS STILL HAPPENING
An issue I have seen periodically came up on LinkedIn yesterday. A defendant was complaining that there was a lack of co-operation by the claimant’s solicitor in failing to show them counsel’s Advice in relation to a claim brought by…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY AND REWRITING EVENTS OVER TIME: DEFENDANT DRIVER CAST AROUND FOR AN INTERPRETATION OF THEIR ACTIONS THAT PLACED THEM IN THE BEST LIGHT POSSIBLE
We have looked recently at a number of cases in relation to witness credibility. The judgment of HHJ Martin Picton in Palmer v Timms [2024] EWHC 2292 (KB) is a case where the primary issue at trial was the credibility…
PREPARING TRIAL AND APPLICATION BUNDLES: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 4th DECEMBER 2024
The previous post on Serra -v- Harvey [2024] EWHC 2250 (KB) has led to me finalising a (long-prepared) webinar on bundles. In Serra wasted costs were ordered on an indemnity basis against the claimant’s solicitors because the lateness and condition of the trial bundles. The bundles…
LATE AND “HAPHAZARD” SERVICE OF TRIAL BUNDLES LEADS TO WASTED COSTS ORDER AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS (ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)
There are numerous cases on this blog about trial bundles. The issues never seem to end and have not been solved by the advent of the electronic bundle. This can be seen in the judgment of Deputy High Court Judge…
PROVING THINGS 242: THE CLAIMANT WHO WAS GIVEN A SECOND CHANCE TO PROVE HIS DAMAGES CLAIM
We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Allard v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd [2024] EWHC 2227 (KB). This was looked at earlier in relation to the trial judge’s observations about the wholly inadequate counter-schedule. However…
WHEN A PARTY IS BANKRUPT: WEBINAR ON THE 16th SEPTEMBER 2024: AN IMPORTANT TOPIC THAT MAY HELP FLOAT YOUR BOAT
In The Mayor And Burgesses of the London Borough of Richmond v Trotman [2024] EWHC 2145 (KB) Mr Justice Kerr was critical of the claimant’s failure to consider the consequences of the defendant being bankrupt. Insolvency issues in litigation…
THE COUNCIL MUST PAY THE COSTS OF ITS EXPERT’S CHANGE OF MIND: THE DUTY TO TEST THE STRENGTH OF THE CASE WITH AN EXPERT CONSIDERED
There is an interesting consideration of the duties relating to the interplay between lawyer and expert in the judgment of Fordham J in Halton Borough Council, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and…
“IT IS ENTIRELY OUTSIDE THE REMIT OF AN EXPERT TO DECIDE WHICH WITNESSES OF FACT HE BELIEVES OR DISBELIEVES”: DEFENDANT’S WITNESS DOES NOT FARE WELL
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Allard v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd [2024] EWHC 2227 (KB). More accurately to the first instance decision which the defendant attempted (unsuccessfully) to appeal. This time in relation to…
MAKING APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT: A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2024
It is surprising how many applications are made which do not comply with the most basic requirements of procedure and evidence. This webinar on the 10th September 2024 aims to help practitioners avoid errors and aims to ensure that participants…
A TRIAL BUNDLE THAT WAS A “CHAOTIC MESS”; NON COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS AND “PROCEDURAL TRENCH WARFARE”
There are interesting procedural aspects in the judgment of Simon Gleeson in Carl v Hawkins & Ors [2024] EWHC 2186 (Ch). The case, about historic sports cars, involved (among other things) “procedural trench warfare”; highly defective bundles; non-compliant witness statements;…
VALUATION EXPERTS SHOULD SHOW THEIR CALCULATIONS: ESTIMATING A VALUE AND WORKING BACKWARDS TO JUSTIFY THAT DOES NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE COURT
In Sahota v Sahota & Ors [2024] EWHC 2165 (Ch) HHJ Rawlings (sitting as a High Court Judge)was critical of an expert witness who, in essence, worked backwards in relation to a valuation. The judge found that having come to…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, WITNESSES, EVIDENCE AND PSYCHOLOGY: GUIDANCE FROM THE EAST: ANOTHER EXAMPLE FROM A DECADE AGO THAT REMAINS RELEVANT
We are looking again at the skills necessary to take accurate witness statements. Here we revisit a real gem of an article by Ula Cartwright-Finch and Alex Waksman of Herbert Smith Freehills on the accuracy of witness statements and the…
You must be logged in to post a comment.