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
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 62: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS WHEN INTERVIEWING WITNESSES - CAN (OR WILL) LEAD TO PROBLEMS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 62: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS WHEN INTERVIEWING WITNESSES – CAN (OR WILL) LEAD TO PROBLEMS

September 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Examination in chief is rare in civil cases, many (perhaps most) practitioners will never have seen it done in court.   There is a rule against asking leading questions  when taking a witness through their evidence.   There is a good reason…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 61: SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 61: SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS

September 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content

This post is caused by a search term that led to this blog “similar fact evidence in civil litigation”.   This would be an apposite time to review the principles relating to similar fact evidence and the relevant case law.  …

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FORENSIC AND PROFESSIONAL DANGERS OF FAILING TO CONSIDER, AND GIVE EVIDENCE OF, THE SOURCE AND INFORMATION AND BELIEF

September 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The previous post on the judgment in Baynton-Williams v Baynton-Williams [2019] EWHC 2179 (Ch) gives me a chance to return to a hobby horse – the need to give the source of information and belief when signing a witness statement.  Here…

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL:  KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE - A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

AN ABSOLUTE CAR CRASH OF AN APPEAL: KNOW WHAT DOCUMENTS WERE BEFORE THE THE JUDGE – A BASIC ISSUE FOR ALL WOULD BE APPELLANTS

September 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

Appeals are always difficult.  The appellate court has to be persuaded that the first-instance judge was “wrong”, and this is a fairly rigorous test.  It is made far more difficult if the appellate court is given the wrong documents. Particularly…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 59: WHEN A CLIENT DISOWNS THEIR OWN WITNESS STATEMENT? SELF PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 59: WHEN A CLIENT DISOWNS THEIR OWN WITNESS STATEMENT? SELF PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER

August 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Witness statements

There has been much discussion on Twitter tonight in relation to the language used in witness statements. That led to this account being given by “Sweary Expat” a lawyer based in the Cayman Islands (some people clearly have to suffer…

COURT OF APPEAL ORDER RETRIAL FOLLOWING JUDGE'S FAILURE TO GIVE ADEQUATE REASONS: THE "BUILDING BLOCKS" OF FACT FINDING

COURT OF APPEAL ORDER RETRIAL FOLLOWING JUDGE’S FAILURE TO GIVE ADEQUATE REASONS: THE “BUILDING BLOCKS” OF FACT FINDING

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

Attempts to appeal findings of fact are extremely common, so common that I have stopped writing about them.  There is also a common theme – the judge should not have found that, says the appellant: it was a finding open…

THE DANGERS OF AN "ENTHUSIASTIC" EXPERT - CASTS DOUBTS ON THEIR RELIABILITY

THE DANGERS OF AN “ENTHUSIASTIC” EXPERT – CASTS DOUBTS ON THEIR RELIABILITY

August 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Most clients are happy to find an expert witness who agrees with their case. Even better, it may be thought, is an eminent expert who feels very strongly about the case.  However, as we have seen so often on this…

DELAY OF 18 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT DID NOT UNDERMINE THE JUDGE'S VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY

DELAY OF 18 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT DID NOT UNDERMINE THE JUDGE’S VIEW AS TO CREDIBILITY

July 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Nuttal & Anor v Kerr & Anor [2019] EWHC 1977 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman rejected an argument that an excessive delay in giving judgment meant that the trial judge’s conclusions were innately unreliable.  (The judgment also reviews the authorities…

DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS MENTIONED IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: MENTION MUST MEAN "SPECIFICALLY MENTION"

DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS MENTIONED IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: MENTION MUST MEAN “SPECIFICALLY MENTION”

July 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Rudd v Bridle & Anor [2019] EWHC 1986 (QB) also considered, and rejected, the claimant’s application for specific disclosure of documents.  Mr Justice Warby held that for an order to be made under CPR 31.15 there must be…

PROVING THINGS 160: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED:  COURT CAN DIRECT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE BE FILED

PROVING THINGS 160: DELAY MUST BE EXPLAINED: COURT CAN DIRECT THAT EXTRA EVIDENCE BE FILED

July 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Extensions of time, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Hendry v Hendry & Ors [2019] EWHC 1976 (Ch) Master Shuman refused the claimant’s application for an extension of time to bring proceedings under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975. THE CASE The claimant was married…

PROVING THINGS 157: DEFECTS IN EVIDENCE "SO FUNDAMENTAL" THAT APPLICATION DISMISSED

PROVING THINGS 157: DEFECTS IN EVIDENCE “SO FUNDAMENTAL” THAT APPLICATION DISMISSED

July 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Mircom International Content Management & Consulting Ltd & Ors v Virgin Media Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 1827 (Ch) Mr Recorder Campbell QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused an application on the grounds that the evidence was…

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (2): BE LEGALLY STREETWISE : A LITIGATION CLIENT'S STRATEGY MAY POSSIBLY BE TO BLAME YOU

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (2): BE LEGALLY STREETWISE : A LITIGATION CLIENT’S STRATEGY MAY POSSIBLY BE TO BLAME YOU

July 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Useful links, Well being

In the second in this series I am reminding everyone of a very useful post from Darlingtons solicitors . I said at the time it was first written that it deserved wider publication, and they kindly agreed I could reproduce it. …

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (1): READ THIS CASE: BE WARY OF OPENING YOUR MOUTH TOO WIDE: TURN DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GET £2.00 INSTEAD

ADVICE TO A NEWLY QUALIFIED LITIGATOR (1): READ THIS CASE: BE WARY OF OPENING YOUR MOUTH TOO WIDE: TURN DOWN £1.5 MILLION AND GET £2.00 INSTEAD

July 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

A member of my family qualifies as a solicitor tomorrow and starts working in litigation.  I have been pondering the best advice to give a newly qualified litigation solicitor.  I intended a recap post of all those cases where litigants…

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FINER DETAIL: NO ROOM FOR A MARGIN OF ERROR

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE FINER DETAIL: NO ROOM FOR A MARGIN OF ERROR

July 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

 A search led to this blog today “witness statement margin” which led me to look this issue up and realise that, despite the dozens of posts on witness statements on this blog,  the important issue of margin size has never…

MEMORY IS FLUID AND MALLEABLE: CENTRAL TO THE OUTCOME OF A TRIAL: GESTMIN CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

MEMORY IS FLUID AND MALLEABLE: CENTRAL TO THE OUTCOME OF A TRIAL: GESTMIN CONSIDERED AND APPLIED

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Another aspect of the judgment in Walsh v Greystone Financial Services Ltd [2019] EWHC 1719 (Ch)  was the trial depended largely on the judge’s assessment of the evidence of the claimant.  There was reference, unsurprisingly, to Gestmin. “Memory is fluid…

WHEN THE EXPERT WITNESS ACTUALLY SAYS THEY ARE AN "ADVOCATE": WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN?

WHEN THE EXPERT WITNESS ACTUALLY SAYS THEY ARE AN “ADVOCATE”: WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN?

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In LIC Telecommunications SARL & Anor v VTB Capital Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 1747 (Comm)  Mrs Justice Moulder made some telling observations in relation to the expert evidence. THE CASE The application concerned whether certain proceedings were duly authorised….

"CHARACTER EVIDENCE" IN CIVIL CASES: NOT ALLOWED (AND NOT MUCH USE ANYWAY)

“CHARACTER EVIDENCE” IN CIVIL CASES: NOT ALLOWED (AND NOT MUCH USE ANYWAY)

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Walsh v Greystone Financial Services Ltd [2019] EWHC 1719 (Ch) Mr Justice Nugee made some observations about evidence that was, in part, “character evidence”. THE CASE The claimant brought an action seeking damages after being advised to invest in…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 50: THE POSTS SO FAR

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 50: THE POSTS SO FAR

July 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Admissions, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Costs budgeting, Credibility of experts, Experts, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Statements of Case, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

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”.   Some people have expressed surprise and how “basic” some points are…

A PARTY CAN'T DUMP DOCUMENTS ON THEIR OPPONENT THE NIGHT BEFORE A HEARING: JUDGE REFUSES PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE SERVED VERY LATE

A PARTY CAN’T DUMP DOCUMENTS ON THEIR OPPONENT THE NIGHT BEFORE A HEARING: JUDGE REFUSES PERMISSION TO RELY ON EVIDENCE SERVED VERY LATE

June 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Serving documents

In Willow Corp S.À.R.L. v MTD Contractors Ltd [2019] EWHC 1591 (TCC) Mr Justice Pepperall refused to allow a party to rely on documents served very late in an application for summary judgment.   The late “dumping” of documents, the evening…

WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND ONE DAY THEY WILL)- TELL SOMEONE, HAVE A PLAN, DON'T LIE, AND READ STEVE CORNFORTH'S BLOG

WHEN THINGS GO WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND ONE DAY THEY WILL)- TELL SOMEONE, HAVE A PLAN, DON’T LIE, AND READ STEVE CORNFORTH’S BLOG

June 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Members Content, Useful links, Well being

Steve Cornforth’s blog contains a post this week “Why does this keep happening?” He points to, yet another, case of a fee earner ” whose career in in tatters because they have tried to cover up mistakes”. The post contains…

PROVING THINGS 155: WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT GOES WRONG: HOTEL PROPRIETOR NOT LIABLE TO GUEST FOR ASSAULT BY TRESPASSER

PROVING THINGS 155: WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT GOES WRONG: HOTEL PROPRIETOR NOT LIABLE TO GUEST FOR ASSAULT BY TRESPASSER

June 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Al-Najar & Ors v The Cumberland Hotel (London) Ltd [2019] EWHC 1593 (QB)  Mr Justice Dingemans found that proprietors of a hotel had not been in breach of duty when some of their guests had been assaulted by a…

THE ASSESSMENT OF WITNESS EVIDENCE: NOT A MINER MATTER: WITNESSES TEND TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY WANT TO BELIEVE

THE ASSESSMENT OF WITNESS EVIDENCE: NOT A MINER MATTER: WITNESSES TEND TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY WANT TO BELIEVE

June 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Many judgments in contested trial contain a section where the judge gives an overview of the witness evidence, and their assessment of the credibility of those who gave evidence.  The judgment of HHJ Eyre QC in  The National Union of…

FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE TASK OF THE TRIAL JUDGE: A REASONED DETERMINATION OF THE DISPUTE ON THE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL - NOT A SEARCH FOR "THE TRUTH"

FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE TASK OF THE TRIAL JUDGE: A REASONED DETERMINATION OF THE DISPUTE ON THE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL – NOT A SEARCH FOR “THE TRUTH”

June 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There has been a spate of cases recently relating to appeals of findings of fact by a trial judge. There are major problems in such appeals, this is illustrated by the judgment of Mr Justice Andrew Baker in Auliffe &…

THE DANGERS OF A LAWYER GIVING EVIDENCE: A "SOMEWHAT STRANGLED VERSION" OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION & BELIEF: SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION DISMISSED BECAUSE OF PAUCITY OF  FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE

THE DANGERS OF A LAWYER GIVING EVIDENCE: A “SOMEWHAT STRANGLED VERSION” OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION & BELIEF: SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION DISMISSED BECAUSE OF PAUCITY OF FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE

June 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Summary judgment, Witness statements

There are numerous posts on the blog about the need for first-hand evidence to be given, and the dangers of a lawyer making witness statements.  These risks are exemplified in the judgment of Chief Master Marsh today in The David…

THE EXPERT WITNESS AND THE "HIRED GUN": THE FACT THAT EXPERTS WERE VERY EXPENSIVE (AND FEES WERE FIXED IN RETROSPECT) DID NOT MAKE THEM UNRELIABLE

THE EXPERT WITNESS AND THE “HIRED GUN”: THE FACT THAT EXPERTS WERE VERY EXPENSIVE (AND FEES WERE FIXED IN RETROSPECT) DID NOT MAKE THEM UNRELIABLE

June 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In O’Leary v Mercy University Hospital Cork Ltd [2019] IESC 48 the Supreme Court of Ireland made some telling observations on the role of the expert witness. Problems with experts are clearly not confined to one jurisdiction. OPENING OBSERVATIONS OF…

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (4): THE SINGLE JOINT  EXPERT IS NOT A DEMIGOD

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (4): THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT IS NOT A DEMIGOD

June 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

This blog looked recently at the case of O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23 where the trial judge was critical of a jointly instructed expert’s attempt to find facts and state that something was “proven by overwhelming evidence”.  That case contains…

ASKING QUESTIONS AFTER JUDGMENT: NOT TO BE USED IN AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN THE CASE (OR ARGUE A DIFFERENT CASE ON DIFFERENT GROUNDS)

ASKING QUESTIONS AFTER JUDGMENT: NOT TO BE USED IN AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN THE CASE (OR ARGUE A DIFFERENT CASE ON DIFFERENT GROUNDS)

June 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am looking again at the decision in  O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23. That case predates the more recent Court of Appeal judgment in  Children [2019] EWCA Civ 898. However it is another example of a party attempting to use the…

"VERY UNFORTUNATELY, ON TWO OCCASIONS... THE ... JUDGE FELL ASLEEP": APPEAL ALLOWED

“VERY UNFORTUNATELY, ON TWO OCCASIONS… THE … JUDGE FELL ASLEEP”: APPEAL ALLOWED

May 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Members Content

In Science Museum Group v Wess [2019] UKEAT 0260 HHJ Auberach made a finding that the Employment Judge had fallen asleep. The appeal was allowed on this ground alone. “I find as a fact that, very unfortunately, on the afternoon…

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (1): GUIDANCE FROM THE LAWYERIST: "MUCH LIKE A COWBOY HERDING CATTLE"

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (1): GUIDANCE FROM THE LAWYERIST: “MUCH LIKE A COWBOY HERDING CATTLE”

May 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Instructing expert witnesses is an important step in many actions.  The advantages, and problems, caused by experts are well known and widely reported recently.  This is one of the matters that crosses boundaries and gives rise to common problems across…

WHO IS AN EXPERT? NOW THERE'S A QUESTION: DEFINITIONS OF "EXPERT" CONSIDERED

WHO IS AN EXPERT? NOW THERE’S A QUESTION: DEFINITIONS OF “EXPERT” CONSIDERED

May 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The collapse of the “carbon credit fraud” prosecution today because an “expert” was found out to have no actual expertise leads to consideration of how  exactly the courts define an “expert” .  This does not give rise to a straightforward…

"THIS WAS A DECISION TAKEN ON FACTS UNSUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE":  MASSIVE INCOMPETENCE BY THE PAROLE BOARD: WHERE TWO CASES GET CONFUSED - HOW CAN WE SLEEP AT NIGHT?

“THIS WAS A DECISION TAKEN ON FACTS UNSUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE”: MASSIVE INCOMPETENCE BY THE PAROLE BOARD: WHERE TWO CASES GET CONFUSED – HOW CAN WE SLEEP AT NIGHT?

May 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

It is unusual for this blog to look at decisions relating to Parole Board. However the careful gathering and analysis of evidence is central to every litigator’s role.  A remarkable set of facts is outlined in the judgment of  HHJ…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 47: THE FORMAL (AND MANDATORY) REQUIREMENTS OF A WITNESS STATEMENT:  A CHECKLIST

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 47: THE FORMAL (AND MANDATORY) REQUIREMENTS OF A WITNESS STATEMENT: A CHECKLIST

May 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Another short post caused by a discussion on Twitter about the number of witness statements that fail to comply with the most basic, mandatory, obligations in the Rules.  The formal requirements of a witness statement are overlooked at the litigator’s…

PROVING THINGS 152: CLAIMANT, BRINGING ACTION 50 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT, NOT QUITE THROWN TO THE WOLVES, BUT...

PROVING THINGS 152: CLAIMANT, BRINGING ACTION 50 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT, NOT QUITE THROWN TO THE WOLVES, BUT…

May 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Davies v Wolverhampton Wanderers Football Club (1986) Ltd [2019] EWHC 1252 (Ch) is an example of a case that rested on a very thin strand of , as it turned out extremely flimsy, evidence. “He is giving evidence about events…

EXPERT EVIDENCE, LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: WEBINAR 2nd JULY 2019

EXPERT EVIDENCE, LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: WEBINAR 2nd JULY 2019

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Courses, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are more than 500 posts on this blog that deal with, or mention, expert evidence. It is a central feature of much litigation. I am giving a webinar on the relevant law, practice and procedure of experts on the…

PROVING THINGS 151: DEPENDENCY IN A FATAL ACCIDENT ACT CLAIM:  ADULT CHILD DEPENDANTS RECEIVE DAMAGES FOR FUTURE CONTRIBUTIONS TO WEDDINGS AND TOWARDS THEIR FIRST HOME

PROVING THINGS 151: DEPENDENCY IN A FATAL ACCIDENT ACT CLAIM: ADULT CHILD DEPENDANTS RECEIVE DAMAGES FOR FUTURE CONTRIBUTIONS TO WEDDINGS AND TOWARDS THEIR FIRST HOME

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Courses, Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

In  AB v KL [2019] EWHC 611 (QB) David Edwards QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) considered the nature of the evidence needed to establish damages under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976.  It is also important both…

TRYING TO SERVE A SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT'S REPORT: WHEN DO THE DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY?

TRYING TO SERVE A SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT’S REPORT: WHEN DO THE DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY?

May 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Global Horizons Corporation -v- Gray [2019] EWHC 1132 (Ch) Mr Justice Arnold considered the question of when the Denton principles apply to service of a “supplementary” medical report.   “… the question of whether an application for permission to…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 44: JUST DON'T WRITE RUDE THINGS : LANGUAGE THAT IS "FAR REMOVED FROM THE PROFESSIONAL COURTESY THAT SOLICITORS ARE EXPECTED TO SHOW EACH OTHER"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 44: JUST DON’T WRITE RUDE THINGS : LANGUAGE THAT IS “FAR REMOVED FROM THE PROFESSIONAL COURTESY THAT SOLICITORS ARE EXPECTED TO SHOW EACH OTHER”

May 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Disclosure, Members Content

Don’t write rude things.  Not even in internal emails or texts. One day it may (and probably will) come back to haunt you.  Read the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke in  ATB Sales Ltd v Rich Energy Ltd & Anor…

DECISION OVERTURNED BECAUSE OF UNFAIR JUDICIAL TREATMENT: "TAKING UP THE CUDGELS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION"

DECISION OVERTURNED BECAUSE OF UNFAIR JUDICIAL TREATMENT: “TAKING UP THE CUDGELS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION”

May 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Appeals, Case Management, Members Content

There are few cases that are overturned on the grounds of unfair judicial treatment. However this was one of grounds the appeal was allowed today in Serafin v Malkiewicz & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 852 “On numerous occasions, the Judge…

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 3: EXPERT WITNESSES ON LIABILITY: THE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT "DID NOT TREAT THE DEFENDANT'S CASE WITH THE IMPARTIALITY WHICH HIS DUTY TO THE COURT REQUIRES"

TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 3: EXPERT WITNESSES ON LIABILITY: THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT “DID NOT TREAT THE DEFENDANT’S CASE WITH THE IMPARTIALITY WHICH HIS DUTY TO THE COURT REQUIRES”

May 17, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Yesterday, at the conference, I was talking on the subject of the use of expert witnesses in establishing liability.  There is an almost immutable rule of law that a new case comes along the day after you have been lecturing…

DEFENDANT CAN ONLY RESPOND TO THE CASE AS PLEADED: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANTS' ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ISSUES

DEFENDANT CAN ONLY RESPOND TO THE CASE AS PLEADED: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANTS’ ATTEMPTS TO INTRODUCE NEW ISSUES

May 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Members Content, Statements of Case

There are two judgments on BAILLI this morning in the Glaxosmithkline case where the judge has resisted the claimants’ attempts to widen the scope of their case beyond the pleaded case and the issues set out in a Group Litigation…

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: SEEKING FURTHER INFORMATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF EXPERT EVIDENCE

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: SEEKING FURTHER INFORMATION AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF EXPERT EVIDENCE

May 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content

I am grateful to Charles Bagot QC for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Price -v-  Cwm Taf University Health Board  [2019] EWHC 938 (QB).   A transcript of the case is available on the…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 42: NON-DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 42: NON-DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS DURING THE COURSE OF PROCEEDINGS

May 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

This post arises out of a Twitter discussion. Someone was reporting that documents that had been disclosed during the course of  ongoing litigation were being put  copied onto  social media. Is this allowed? THE RULES: NON-DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS This is…

WHEN THINGS GO WRONG FOR A DEFENDANT AT TRIAL: FOUR LESSONS FROM ONE CASE: WHEN YOU HAVE AN EXPERT WHO STATES THEY ARE "BIASED"...

WHEN THINGS GO WRONG FOR A DEFENDANT AT TRIAL: FOUR LESSONS FROM ONE CASE: WHEN YOU HAVE AN EXPERT WHO STATES THEY ARE “BIASED”…

May 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Witness statements

In Hanbury & Anor v Hugh James Solicitors (a firm) [2019] EWHC 1074 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip found that a firm of solicitors had been negligent in its conduct of a fatal accident case.  There are a number of lessons…

ASSESSING EVIDENCE  26 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: THE JUDICIAL APPROACH

ASSESSING EVIDENCE 26 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: THE JUDICIAL APPROACH

May 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Taylor v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1043 (Ch) John Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the question of assessing evidence of a brief incident, 26 years after the event, in a case…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 40: HOW CIVIL JUDGES DECIDE CASES

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 40: HOW CIVIL JUDGES DECIDE CASES

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

In Knight & Anor v Knight & Ors [2019] EWHC 915 (Ch) HHJ Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) set out a summary of how civil judges decide cases. It is a useful reminder to all of those involved…

WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESS CANNOT READ ENGLISH: NOT GROUNDS FOR STRIKING OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS MAY NOT BE REQUIRED

WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESS CANNOT READ ENGLISH: NOT GROUNDS FOR STRIKING OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS MAY NOT BE REQUIRED

April 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Waraich & Anor v Ansari Solicitors (A firm) [2019] EWHC 1038 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the issues that arose when a point arose at the beginning of a trial in relation to signature…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 39: A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS: THE RULES AND CASE LAW

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 39: A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS: THE RULES AND CASE LAW

April 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In a discussion about the 20th anniversary of the Civil Procedure Rules on Twitter today someone asked if “Notices to Admit Facts” were still available, they had not seen one for a long time. The rules still permit parties to…

AN "UNFORTUNATE CHANGE OF VIEW" BY AN EXPERT: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A REPORT NOT BEING ROBUST AND CAUSING DIFFICULTY FOR LITIGANTS

AN “UNFORTUNATE CHANGE OF VIEW” BY AN EXPERT: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A REPORT NOT BEING ROBUST AND CAUSING DIFFICULTY FOR LITIGANTS

April 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Risks of litigation

There have been several posts this month about experts, particularly valuation experts.  There are short passages in the judgment of Chief Master Marsh in  Bakrania & Anor v Shah & Ors [2019] EWHC 949 (Ch)  which provide another example. THE…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 36A: UNDERSTANDING "LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING"

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 36A: UNDERSTANDING “LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”

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

In assessing a case, and the evidence of both sides, litigators have to be aware of the process of  “litigation wishful thinking”.  Witnesses may be perfectly honest, but their memories as to what happened are influenced by what they wish would have…

RECORDINGS ARE DOCUMENTS: AN APPROACH TO EVIDENCE THAT WAS UNSATISFACTORY

RECORDINGS ARE DOCUMENTS: AN APPROACH TO EVIDENCE THAT WAS UNSATISFACTORY

April 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

In the judgment in Guest v Guest & Anor [2019] EWHC 869 (Ch) HHJ Russen (sitting as a High Court judge) commented on the unsatisfactory way in which recordings had been disclosed and produced to the court.  It provides a…

← Previous 1 … 21 22 23 … 30 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHAT IS TO BE DONE WITH LITIGANTS WHO CAN’T KEEP SECRETS (2): EMBARGOED JUDGMENTS: TEN KEY POINTS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR HOW A LETTER TO THE CLIENT SHOULD BE DRAFTED
  • ANOTHER CASE ON BREACH OF A JUDGMENT EMBARGO: WHAT IS TO BE DONE WITH LITIGANTS WHO CAN’T KEEP SECRETS (1)?
  • PROVING THINGS 302 : THE COURT DREW ADVERSE INFERENCES WHEN THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO TEST THE METER IT WAS RELYING ON
  • SERVICE POINTS 57: PRESENCE IN THE JURISDICTION, A LAST KNOWN ADDRESS AND THE COST OF GETTING IT WRONG: UNSUCCESFUL CLAIMANT FACES A COSTS BILL OF £500,000…
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SOME KEY POINTS ABOUT WITNESS SUMMARIES

Top Posts

COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
EXPERT WATCH 78 : "ROWING BACK"?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: "THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT"
DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU COULD BE MADE BANKRUPT (OSTENSIBLY ON YOUR OWN APPLICATION), NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT - AND THEN HAVE TO PAY THE TRUSTEE'S COSTS? THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING KEY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT
COST BITES 448: PART 36 AND FIXED COSTS: "VERY LATE" ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT'S OFFER LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING NO COSTS AT ALL
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 101: PUTTING A FIGURE IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DOES NOT NECESSARILY ENTITLE A CLAIMANT TO DEFAULT JUDGMENT FOR THAT SUM

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.