Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Civil evidence » Page 22
WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO SIGN A DOCUMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF TRUTH: OR SIGN ONE YOURSELF: BEST READ THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO GO TO JAIL

WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO SIGN A DOCUMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF TRUTH: OR SIGN ONE YOURSELF: BEST READ THIS IF YOU DON’T WANT TO GO TO JAIL

March 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 goes much further than a warning to errant experts. It contains important observations that must be considered  by the entire profession. Particularly those who draft statements, and those…

A SECOND ACTION TO SET ASIDE AN EARLIER JUDGMENT OBTAINED BY FRAUD: SUPREME COURT DECISION: THE "BARE KNUCKLE FIGHT" OF THE LAW

A SECOND ACTION TO SET ASIDE AN EARLIER JUDGMENT OBTAINED BY FRAUD: SUPREME COURT DECISION: THE “BARE KNUCKLE FIGHT” OF THE LAW

March 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Takhar v Gracefield Developments Ltd & Ors [2019] UKSC 13 the Supreme Court held that a claimant could bring an action to set aside an earlier judgment which, it is alleged, was obtained by fraud.  The judgment deals with two…

PROVING THINGS 146: NO EVIDENCE AT ALL TO PROVE A LOSS, OR THAT THE DEFENDANT CAUSED ANY "LOSS" (THIS IS BECOMING A FAMILIAR STORY)

PROVING THINGS 146: NO EVIDENCE AT ALL TO PROVE A LOSS, OR THAT THE DEFENDANT CAUSED ANY “LOSS” (THIS IS BECOMING A FAMILIAR STORY)

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

The number of people who are willing to commit to large scale, and expensive, litigation without having the basic evidence to prove their case on damages has proven to be a staple fare for this series.  Another example is the…

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 the Court of Appeal set out clear guidance for courts considering sentencing in  cases relating to reckless contempt on the part of expert witnesses.  A “reckless” statement made…

CASE MANAGEMENT, "RELEVANCE" AND ATTEMPTS TO HOLD THE COURT "IN TERROREM": MORE ON THE POST OFFICE CASE (SOME EXTRAORDINARY ISSUES HERE)

CASE MANAGEMENT, “RELEVANCE” AND ATTEMPTS TO HOLD THE COURT “IN TERROREM”: MORE ON THE POST OFFICE CASE (SOME EXTRAORDINARY ISSUES HERE)

March 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Conduct, Members Content

I am returning to the judgment in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (No 3) [2019] EWHC 606 (QB) because parts of the judgment set out arguments and conduct of litigation that is, to say the least, unusual.   This part…

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: WHEN POST OFFICE WITNESSES DO NOT DELIVER

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: WHEN POST OFFICE WITNESSES DO NOT DELIVER

March 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (No 3) [2019] EWHC 606 (QB) is 1122 paragraphs long, following a two week long trial.  There are aspects of this case I will look at again. However, it is interesting…

GIVING NOTICE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO ATTACK AN EXPERT'S CREDIBILITY: ISSUES THAT ARISE WHEN EXPERT'S HAVE PRIOR DEALINGS WITH THE PARTIES

GIVING NOTICE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO ATTACK AN EXPERT’S CREDIBILITY: ISSUES THAT ARISE WHEN EXPERT’S HAVE PRIOR DEALINGS WITH THE PARTIES

March 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Hamad M. Aldrees & Partners v Rotex Europe Ltd [2019] EWHC 574 (TCC)  Sir Antony Edwards-Stuart expressed concern about an attack on the credibility of an expert witness.  In that case there was no evidence to support an assertion that…

WHEN ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS GO WRONG: IF YOU CAN'T OPERATE BY THE RULES THEY MAY TAKE YOUR LICENCE AWAY...

WHEN ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS GO WRONG: IF YOU CAN’T OPERATE BY THE RULES THEY MAY TAKE YOUR LICENCE AWAY…

March 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Enforcement, Members Content, Witness statements

The enforcement of judgments is an aspect of civil procedure that rarely makes the law reports.  In Rooftops South West Ltd & Ors v Ash Interiors (UK) Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2799 (QB) Master Davison was highly critical of the…

EXPERTS WHO CAN'T REPORT IN TIME: BETTER READ THIS: IF YOU CAN'T REPORT ON TIME PROBABLY BEST NOT TO TAKE INSTRUCTIONS AT ALL...

EXPERTS WHO CAN’T REPORT IN TIME: BETTER READ THIS: IF YOU CAN’T REPORT ON TIME PROBABLY BEST NOT TO TAKE INSTRUCTIONS AT ALL…

March 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In X and Y (Delay : Professional Conduct of Expert) [2019] EWFC B9 HH Clifford Bellamy (sitting as a Deputy Circuit Judge) made some observations in relation to the role of the expert, particularly when that expert cannot report timeously.  The…

PROVING THINGS 143: THE COURTS DON'T REALLY APPRECIATE  EVIDENCE COMING FROM THE NEWS RATHER THAN THE PARTIES: (SHIPS, I SEE NO SHIPS)

PROVING THINGS 143: THE COURTS DON’T REALLY APPRECIATE EVIDENCE COMING FROM THE NEWS RATHER THAN THE PARTIES: (SHIPS, I SEE NO SHIPS)

March 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In The Channel Tunnel Group Ltd & Anor (t/a “Eurotunnel”) v Secretary of State for Transport [2019] EWHC 419 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser expressed concern that witness statements served by the Secretary of State in a civil action were almost immediately…

PROVING THINGS 142: CLAIMANT HAS TO PROVE SIZE OF HIGHWAY DEFECT: PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE "ALMOST COMPLETELY USELESS"

PROVING THINGS 142: CLAIMANT HAS TO PROVE SIZE OF HIGHWAY DEFECT: PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE “ALMOST COMPLETELY USELESS”

March 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment today in  Walsh v The Council of the Borough of Kirklees [2019] EWHC 492 (QB) contains an important message for anyone involved in highway or “tripper” litigation: the claimant has to have evidence to prove the size of the…

THE DANGERS OF TAKING A ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENT - A RECAP

THE DANGERS OF TAKING A ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENT – A RECAP

February 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

A number of recent posts have looked at difficulties caused the the way in which evidence was collected and witness statements drafted.  The taking of one-sided witness statements led to major difficulties for the party who were attempting to rely…

WHEN WITNESSES GO "UP HILL AND DOWN DALE" IN AN ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE: TIME TO LOOK AT THE WAY STATEMENTS ARE PREPARED

WHEN WITNESSES GO “UP HILL AND DOWN DALE” IN AN ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE: TIME TO LOOK AT THE WAY STATEMENTS ARE PREPARED

February 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in  Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC) shows why witness statements should be considered carefully prior to…

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

February 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There was report in the Scottish newspaper The Herald earlier this week about disciplinary proceedings being brought against a doctor who had prepared a “misleading and inaccurate” medical report. In essence the expert reported, as facts, matters that the interviewee…

KEEP YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS SHORT AND TO THE POINT: A SHOT ACROSS THE LITIGANTS' BOWS

KEEP YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS SHORT AND TO THE POINT: A SHOT ACROSS THE LITIGANTS’ BOWS

February 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Azitio Holdings & Ors [2019] EWHC 305 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Baker refused the defendants’ application for an adjournment of a trial date. When doing so he sent a clear message as to the way in…

EXAGGERATION IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WHEN THE DEFENDANT DIGS A BIG EVIDENTIAL HOLE FOR ITSELF

EXAGGERATION IS NOT NECESSARILY FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: WHEN THE DEFENDANT DIGS A BIG EVIDENTIAL HOLE FOR ITSELF

February 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Credibility of experts, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHJ Hampton in Smith -v- Ashwell Maintenance Limited (Leicester County Court 21/01/2019) is available through a Linked In post provided by barrister Andrew Mckie. It provides a number of lessons for those collecting evidence. In a case where…

DEFENDANTS REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: INADEQUATE EXPLANATIONS WILL NOT SUFFICE

DEFENDANTS REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: INADEQUATE EXPLANATIONS WILL NOT SUFFICE

February 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Consult II SRO & Ors v Shire Warwick Lewis Capital Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 286 (Comm) Andrew Henshaw QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused the defendants’ application for relief from sanctions. The lack of a candid explanation…

STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN'T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT'S CASE STRUCK OUT

STRIKING OUT, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND THE PART 8 PROCEDURE: YOU CAN’T RELY ON MATTERS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN PLEADED: CLAIMANT’S CASE STRUCK OUT

February 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

I am grateful to barrister Toby Bishop   for sending me a copy of the judgment of Master Marsh in Bhusate -v- Patel [2018] EWHC 2362 (Ch). Re Bhusate JUDGMENT copy  Toby’s discussion of the substantive issues that arose in the claim can…

SHOULD A "RECKLESS" MEDICAL EXPERT GO TO JAIL? WATCH THE ARGUMENTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SHOULD A “RECKLESS” MEDICAL EXPERT GO TO JAIL? WATCH THE ARGUMENTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

February 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Last year I wrote about the judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 2581 (QB). Among other things in that judgment it was found that a medical expert’s recklessness amounted to contempt of court.  The expert…

VIEWING THE WOOD FROM THE TREES: ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A "CUT OUT AND KEEP" GUIDE

VIEWING THE WOOD FROM THE TREES: ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE

February 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

 The judgment of Teare J in Deripaska and Danilina v Chernukhin case [2019] EWHC 173 (Comm), is (at present) only available via a link on the Serle Court website.  It is useful in that a few paragraphs encapsulate the judicial approach to…

SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM BY EMAIL ALLOWED: THE SAFEGUARDS TO RESPONDENTS TO WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS.

SERVICE OF CLAIM FORM BY EMAIL ALLOWED: THE SAFEGUARDS TO RESPONDENTS TO WITHOUT NOTICE APPLICATIONS.

February 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Injunctions, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

The case and issues in Linklaters LLP -v- Mellish [2019] EWHC 177 (QB) have already made the headlines.   The procedural aspects of the decision are also of interest. Firstly Mr Justice Warby made an order allowing service of the claim form…

PROVING THINGS 140: SPECULATIVE EVIDENCE NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE A "LOSS OF CHANCE"

PROVING THINGS 140: SPECULATIVE EVIDENCE NOT ENOUGH TO PROVE A “LOSS OF CHANCE”

February 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

In Dymoke v Association for Dance Movement Pyschotherapy UK Ltd [2019] EWHC 94 (QB) Mr Justice Popplewell found that a claimant had not adduced sufficient evidence to prove a “loss of chance” in a claim for damages.  This shows that a…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 29:  EXPERTS AND FACTS: EXPERTS WHO VENTURE ONTO THE JUDGE'S TERRITORY DON'T USUALLY FARE TOO WELL

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 29: EXPERTS AND FACTS: EXPERTS WHO VENTURE ONTO THE JUDGE’S TERRITORY DON’T USUALLY FARE TOO WELL

February 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have seen several cases recently where judges have objected, in clear terms, to an expert trying to find “facts”. That is properly a matter for the trial judge.   It is worthwhile looking at the guidance and cases on this…

THE ABSENCE OF KEY DOCUMENTS CANNOT BE EASILY IGNORED: CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL: JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

THE ABSENCE OF KEY DOCUMENTS CANNOT BE EASILY IGNORED: CLAIMANT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL: JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT OVERTURNED ON APPEAL

February 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (GB) Ltd [2019] EWHC 149 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham overturned a judgment in favour of a defendant. The defendant’s failure to produce key documents, or give any explanation for their not being available,  was a major…

THE ORDER THE COURTS CAN MAKE WHEN A DEFENDANT HAS DIED AND THERE ARE NO EXECUTORS OR ADMINISTRATORS

THE ORDER THE COURTS CAN MAKE WHEN A DEFENDANT HAS DIED AND THERE ARE NO EXECUTORS OR ADMINISTRATORS

February 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

Another aspect of the judgment Currie v Thornley & Anor [2019] EWHC.  172 (Ch) relates to the order the courts can make when a defendant in a civil action  has died. THE CASE One of two defendants in a civil action had…

PROVING THINGS 139: WHEN THE JUDGE HAS TO DECIDE WHETHER ITS ALL BEEN A BIT OF A CRUSH

PROVING THINGS 139: WHEN THE JUDGE HAS TO DECIDE WHETHER ITS ALL BEEN A BIT OF A CRUSH

February 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

Most  of the cases looked at in this series are decisions in the High Court. However issues of witness credibility and accuracy are a constant issue throughout virtually every layer of court and tribunal. In Prosser v British Airways Plc [2018]…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 28: EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 28: EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AFFIDAVITS

January 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The “exhibiting” of documents  to witness statements and affidavits is common. It is surprising how common it is for the exhibit, and the witness statement, to fail to comply with the rules. Here we look at the rules relating to…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 26: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 26: WHEN CAN A WITNESS BE EXCLUDED FROM THE COURT HEARING?

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

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 discretion…

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POLICE REPORTS AS EVIDENCE: NO NEGLIGENCE WHEN DRIVER FEARED HE WAS TO BE ASSAULTED: A CASE TO POINT

THE ADMISSIBILITY OF POLICE REPORTS AS EVIDENCE: NO NEGLIGENCE WHEN DRIVER FEARED HE WAS TO BE ASSAULTED: A CASE TO POINT

January 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Mohmed v Barnes & Anor [2019] EWHC 87 (QB) Mr Justice Turner found that a driver had not been negligent when he drove into a pedestrian an attempt to escape an assault. The case is important in relation to an…

UNDERSTANDING LEGAL TERMINOLOGY: USEFUL GUIDANCE: IT DOESN'T ALL RES IPSA LOQUITUR  YOU KNOW

UNDERSTANDING LEGAL TERMINOLOGY: USEFUL GUIDANCE: IT DOESN’T ALL RES IPSA LOQUITUR YOU KNOW

January 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Radio 4 programme “Word of Mouth” had a programme last week on “legal language”: “demystifying the language of the court room”. This led one of the participants, barrister, author and blogger Lucy Reed to write a post “Why do…

EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I usually look at cases in the family courts when there are judgments that may be of some interest to civil litigators.  The judgment  of Mr Justice Keehan in M v Derbyshire County Council & Ors [2018] EWHC 3734 (Fam) …

PROVING THINGS 137: PROVING A DEFENCE TO A COUNTERCLAIM: NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE MATTERS - THEN JUDGMENT IS GOING TO BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU

PROVING THINGS 137: PROVING A DEFENCE TO A COUNTERCLAIM: NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE MATTERS – THEN JUDGMENT IS GOING TO BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in UK Dry Risers Ltd v Maher [2019] EWHC 44 (QB) shows the importance of being able to prove a defence to a counterclaim. The claimant succeeded on a claim for £3,690.72, the defendant obtained a judgment for £13,628.00. …

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND TRANSLATION: WHY YOU CAN'T RELY ON PD 22 IN RELATION TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND TRANSLATION: WHY YOU CAN’T RELY ON PD 22 IN RELATION TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

January 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the third post on this subject in one day.  Someone responded to the first post on the need to for witness statements to be in the language of the witness by asserting that Practice Direction 22 could be…

WHEN A WITNESS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH:  INTERPRETING THE RULES: GUIDANCE FROM THE CASES

WHEN A WITNESS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH: INTERPRETING THE RULES: GUIDANCE FROM THE CASES

January 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

If a witness cannot speak English and a witness statement is required what needs to be done? There are several cases where the issue of translation has caused a problem at trial.  The best guidance comes from the Family Division….

ADVERSE INFERENCES DRAWN WHEN SOLICITOR DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE: IF YOU'VE HAD £22 MILLION YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN IT

ADVERSE INFERENCES DRAWN WHEN SOLICITOR DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE: IF YOU’VE HAD £22 MILLION YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN IT

January 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In The Lord Chancellor v Blavo & Co Solictors Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 3556 (QB) Mr Justice Pepperall found it was appropriate to draw adverse inferences when key  participants did not give evidence.  It is another example of the principles…

"DENTON" PRINCIPLES DO NOT APPLY TO SECTION 33 APPLICATIONS: HIGH COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT'S ARGUMENT THAT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS PRINCIPLES SHOULD BE APPLIED TO LIMITATION ACT

“DENTON” PRINCIPLES DO NOT APPLY TO SECTION 33 APPLICATIONS: HIGH COURT REJECTS DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENT THAT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS PRINCIPLES SHOULD BE APPLIED TO LIMITATION ACT

December 23, 2018 · by gexall · in Limitation, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Ellis v Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust & Ors [2018] EWHC 3505 (Ch) HHJ McKenna (sitting in the High Court) roundly rejected an argument that the court should apply “Denton” type guidance to a claimant’s application to disapply the…

PROVING THINGS 135: WHAT A DIFFERENCE CROSS-EXAMINATION CAN MAKE

PROVING THINGS 135: WHAT A DIFFERENCE CROSS-EXAMINATION CAN MAKE

December 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There has been much controversy recently about the need for cross-examination when allegations are made.  I have no intention of entering that controversy, however those who want to be fully informed on these matters should read the judgment of Mr…

CROSS-EXAMINATION: THE DUTY TO PUT A CASE: A GEM OF A DECISION

CROSS-EXAMINATION: THE DUTY TO PUT A CASE: A GEM OF A DECISION

November 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In W Nagel (A Firm) v Pluczenik Diamond Company NV [2018] EWCA Civ 2640 the Court of Appeal made an important observation about the duty of a cross-examiner to put their client’s case to an opposing witness. This provides an opportunity…

PROVING THINGS 134: WINNING A FEW BATTLES BUT LOSING THE WAR: ALL IS NOT ROSY IN THESE CLAIMANTS’ GARDEN

November 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

Law students have probably already been taught, and will be lectured for generations to come, about the implications of the Court of Appeal decision in Lejonvarn v Burgess & Anor [2017] EWCA Civ 254. If any of those law students plan…

LINKS TO GUIDANCE ON DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENT: INTERACTIVE BLOGGING

LINKS TO GUIDANCE ON DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENT: INTERACTIVE BLOGGING

November 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Witness statements

Yesterday I was speaking on the APIL Fatal Accidents course. One of the points I was making was the importance of reading the rules and and guidance in relation to the drafting of witness statements.   The delegates asked for links…

PROVING THINGS 133: FALLING OFF A BED AND THE PIECES OF THE JIGSAW

PROVING THINGS 133: FALLING OFF A BED AND THE PIECES OF THE JIGSAW

November 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

The case of Busby v Berkshire Bed Company Ltd [2018] EWHC 2976 (QB) was one of those cases that centred on credible evidence. It is an example of where witnesses can be totally honest but mistaken in their recollection. The judge…

YOU CANNOT ARGUE A "NEW" CASE AT THE APPEAL STAGE: "RACING" DRIVERS NOT INVOLVED IN A CRIMINAL JOINT ENTERPRISE: FATAL ACCIDENT ACT DAMAGES AWARDED

YOU CANNOT ARGUE A “NEW” CASE AT THE APPEAL STAGE: “RACING” DRIVERS NOT INVOLVED IN A CRIMINAL JOINT ENTERPRISE: FATAL ACCIDENT ACT DAMAGES AWARDED

November 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In Wallett & Ors v Vickers [2018] EWHC 3088 (QB) Mr Justice Males overturned a decision in favour of the defendant and awarded damages to the estate of a deceased driver. The important procedural issue is that the defendant were not…

WHEN WITNESSES DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE SAYING: WHY THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IS IMPORTANT

WHEN WITNESSES DIDN’T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE SAYING: WHY THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IS IMPORTANT

November 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a short passage in the judgment in GPP Big Field LLP & Anor v Solar EPC Solutions SL [2018] EWHC 2866 (Comm) that shows (not for the first time this year) that those responsible for drafting witness statements often…

REVEALING THE TRUE IDENTITY OF A WITNESS IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: APPLICATION FOR ANONYMITY SCUTTLED

REVEALING THE TRUE IDENTITY OF A WITNESS IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: APPLICATION FOR ANONYMITY SCUTTLED

November 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In the judgment today in  Suez Fortune Investments Ltd & Anor v Talbot Underwriting Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2929 (Comm) Mr Justice Teare allowed an application by the defendants that the true identity of a witness be disclosed.  The witness…

EXTENSIVE WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT WAS OF NO USE: A COMMON FINDING

EXTENSIVE WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT WAS OF NO USE: A COMMON FINDING

November 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Witness statements

We have already looked at the judgment of Mrs Justice Cockerill in  Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm). It is worth looking at what the judge had to say about the witness evidence before…

UNDERSTANDING THE CODED LANGUAGE OF THE LEGAL DIRECTORIES: HUMBLEBRAGS AND BEYOND

UNDERSTANDING THE CODED LANGUAGE OF THE LEGAL DIRECTORIES: HUMBLEBRAGS AND BEYOND

November 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Charity, Civil evidence, Members Content

This if the time of year that several legal directories are published.  It leads to an inevitable pattern of behaviour.  Thanks to law lecturer John Bates we can all now understand the coded language of the legal directory. THE PATTERN…

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHY YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS NEED REGULAR REMINDERS OF THE RULES & CASES

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHY YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS NEED REGULAR REMINDERS OF THE RULES & CASES

November 2, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill made some important observations that apply to every aspect of litigation.  We looked at the case yesterday: a stark reminder was provided of the dangers…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE

October 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The post earlier today on the deficiencies in a witness statement  that led to it being excluded provides a good opportunity to reprise certain key points.  Not only was the excluded statement essentially “commentary” and “opinion” it also failed to…

PROVING THINGS 130: BY THE TIME OF TRIAL YOU SHOULD REALLY KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE LOST: SOME  OF THESE CLAIMANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED NO LOSS AT ALL

PROVING THINGS 130: BY THE TIME OF TRIAL YOU SHOULD REALLY KNOW WHAT YOU HAVE LOST: SOME OF THESE CLAIMANTS MAY HAVE SUFFERED NO LOSS AT ALL

October 26, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

The final paragraphs of the judgment in Anderson & Ors v Sense Network Ltd [2018] EWHC 2834 shows that some of the claimants in that case were unable to establish their losses. Indeed two of the claimants may have suffered no…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR'S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE - THREE TIMES

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 4: THE SCOPE OF THE SOLICITOR’S RETAINER: TURN DOWN AN OFFER OF £500,000 AND LOSE – THREE TIMES

October 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In  Lyons v Fox Williams LLP [2018] EWCA Civ 2347 the Court of Appeal turned down the claimant’s appeal.  The claimant had been unsuccessful in an action for professional negligence against a firm of solicitors. He was equally unsuccessful on appeal….

← Previous 1 … 21 22 23 … 29 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS…)
  • THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
  • EXPERT WATCH 71: “I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE”: THE EXPERT WAS “ADVOCATING” AND “HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
  • MORE ABOUT THE CASE AGAINST A SOLICITOR BEING STRUCK OUT: THE ABSENCE OF AN ASSUMPTION OF RESPONSIBILITY MEANT THERE WAS NO CASE: A CLAIMANT CANNOT HOPE THAT “SOMETHING WILL TURN UP” ON DISCLOSURE…

Top Posts

TUPE DOES NOT PASS ON LIABILITIES TO THIRD PARTIES: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
EXPERT WATCH 70: EXPERTS' FAILURES TO REPORT ON THE RANGE OF OPINIONS LEADS TO THEIR VIEWS BEING REJECTED: ESSENTIAL READING FOR EVERY PERSONAL INJURY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE LAWYER, ANYONE WHO INSTRUCTS AN EXPERT (AND ANY EXPERT...)
THE IMPORTANT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN APPLICATION TO STRIKE OUT AND ONE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT: DECISION TO STRIKE OUT ALLOWED ON APPEAL BECAUSE THE JUDGE HAD WRONGLY CONSIDERED THE MERITS
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (2): HOW TO SPOT "FALSE" AUTHORITIES AND WHAT TO DO ABOUT IT (PLUS SOME USEFUL LINKS)
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (3): AI AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: VERY DANGEROUS BEDFELLOWS: TWENTY KEY POINTS

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.