WHEN ONE EXPERT TELLS THE OTHER EXPERT TO “GO BACK TO SCHOOL”: CASES ON CONDUCT AND THE MEETING OF EXPERTS
The case of Hatfield -v- Drax Power Ltd (18/08/2017)* highlights some of the issues that arise in the meeting of experts. The meeting is an important stage in many types of action, however the case law and rules relating to it…
AN EXPERT REPORT THAT WAS “EXTRAORDINARY IN ITS PRESENTATION AND SHOT THROUGH WITH BREATH TAKING ARROGANCE”: THIS DOESN’T END WELL
Problems caused by expert witnesses feature heavily on this blog. I am grateful to barrister Brian McCluggage for sending me a copy of the decision of Her Honour Judge Belcher in Hatfield -v- Drax Power Ltd (18/08/2017) which contains robust…
THROWING EVERYTHING IN AT TRIAL- INCLUDING THE KITCHEN CABINET: YOU HAVE TO PUT YOUR CASE (AND PLEAD IT)
There are some important observations in the judgment of Mr Justice Henry Carr in Neptune (Europe) Ltd v Devol Kitchens Ltd [2017] EWHC 2172 (Pat) about the need to plead and put a case at trial. An attempt to introduce a…
EXPERT WITNESS GIVEN “NO WEIGHT AT ALL”: FAILURE TO DISCLOSE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There are some interesting passages in the judgment of David Stone (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Technomed Ltd & Anor v Bluecrest Health Screening Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 2142 (Ch). Here we look at the judgment…
PROVING THINGS 66: IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THE CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES: WHERE THERE’S A WILL THERE’S A WAY
This blog regularly looks at cases in which trial judges assess the credibility of witnesses. Here I want to look at the careful analysis of witness evidence by HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court judge) in Legg & Anor…
WITNESS STATEMENTS “INADMISSIBLE”: CONTAINED “SUBJECTIVE INTENTION”, “OPINION” AND “LEGAL ARGUMENT”: ANOTHER EXAMPLE
A brief passage under the judgment of Mr Justice Arnold in Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd v Fougera Sweden Holding 2 AB [2017] EWHC 1995 (Ch) serves to show how much “witness evidence” served by a litigant can, in fact, be inadmissible….
DEFENDANT DEBARRED FROM CALLING WITNESS EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDING FOR DEFENDANT
The case of Durrant -v- Chief Constable of Avon & Somerset Constabulary is a long-running saga. We have looked at it twice before. The incident occurred in 2009. In 2013 the Court of Appeal overturned a judge’s decision to grant…
WRITING TO THE COURT UNILATERALLY (AGAIN) – PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS AND WHY JUDGES NEED THE PATIENCE OF A SAINT
I have no plans to expand this blog to cover issues relating to procedure in Employment Tribunals. However there are certain passages of the judgment of Mr Justice Kerr in Jones v The Secretary of State for Business Innovation &…
PROVING HANDWRITING IN CIVIL CASES: EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ALWAYS NECESSARY
I am returning to the decision of Chief Master Marsh in 44 Wellfit Street Ltd v GMR Services Ltd [2017] EWHC 1841 (Ch). We have already looked at that case in relation to false emails and the significance of CPR 32.19 ….
THE JOB OF THE COURT IN CIVIL CASES: A USEFUL PRIMER: ADJUDICATION, THE BURDEN OF PROOF: THE JUDGE DOES NOT DECIDE WHO HAS THE MORAL HIGH GROUND
In Ball & Ors v Ball & Ors [2017] EWHC 1750 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) set out clearly and succinctly the principles by which the civil courts determine cases. They serve as a…
“MUST” MEANS “MUST”: WHEN CRUCIAL PARTS OF YOUR EVIDENCE AMOUNTS TO NO MORE THAN GOSSIP AND RUMOUR IT CAN BE COSTLY.
I have already written that there are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Lady Justice Thirwall in Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice [2017] EWHC 1040 (QB) (the subsequent judgment on costs is also worth reading and will be covered soon)….
UNDOUBTED FLAWS IN THE WAY WITNESS STATEMENTS WERE DRAFTED: LEADS TO A WASTE OF TIME AND COSTS
There are many reasons litigators should read the judgment of Lady Justice Thirwall in Marsh -v- Ministry of Justice [2017] EWHC 1040 (QB, Here I want to concentrate upon the witness statements, in particular the defendant’s witness statements. It is another…
ERRANT EVIDENCE AND PHYSICAL EVIDENCE THAT GOES MISSING: CLAIMANT’S EXPERTS FEEL THE HEAT
I am returning for the fifth time to the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit Merrell Technology Limited [2017] EWHC 1763 (TCC). We have seen the judge’s views on the witnesses, the claimant’s disclosure and arguments that…
COUNSEL’S OPINION OF NO VALUE AT ALL: (ON THIS OCCASION ANYWAY)
I am returning for the fourth time (and still not the last time) to the decision of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit Merrell Technology Limited [2017] EWHC 1763 (TCC). The parties had exchanged written opinions of leading counsel…
DEFICIENCIES IN DISCLOSURE: READING THIS JUDGMENT IS NOT LIKE WATCHING PAINT DRY
A case that concerns the fitting of specialist piping at a paint factory may seem an unlikely starting point for procedural controversy. However I am looking again in the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Imperial Chemical Industries Limited -v- Merit…
ABSENT WITNESSES CONSIDERED: REASONS FOR ABSENCE NOT ACCEPTED COMPARED TO CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT NOTICE
In Coreix Ltd -v- Coretx Holdings [2017] EWHC 1695 (IPEC) the trial judge was faced with the approach that should be adopted in relation to witnesses that were not at trial. THE CASE The action was a for breach of trademark…
EXPERTS NOT WELLCOME HERE (NOT YET ANYWAY): PARTIES NEED TO ESTABLISH NEED FOR EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Glaxo Wellcome Uk Limited -v- Sandoz Limited [2017] EWHC 1524 (Ch) Chief Master Marsh refused the defendants’ application to rely on three expert witnesses. The judgment contains interesting observations on the nature of the information that needs to be…
ADVERSE INFERENCES FROM ABSENT WITNESSES: ANOTHER EXAMPLE IN THE HIGH COURT
In NRC Holding Limited -v- Danilitskiy [2017] EWHC 1431 (Ch) Robin Dicker QC, sitting as a High Court judge, considered the inferences that should be drawn when a key individual did not give evidence. THE CASE The claimant had a…
PROVING THINGS 62: “TOTALLY UNSATISFACTORY” EVIDENCE AT TRIAL FAILS TO PROVE SPECIAL DAMAGES
I wrote about the judgment in Stewart & Chergui -v- The Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis [2017] EWHC 921 (QB), yesterday. There is no harm in repeating one element of that post in this series. I am repeating it because…
WHAT CAN A DEFENDANT ARGUE ABOUT DAMAGES WHEN ITS DEFENCE IS STRUCK OUT? NOTHING
What is the position of a defendant whose action has been struck out? This was the question considered by Mr Justice Soole in Michael -v- Phillips [2017] EWHC 1984 (QB). The short answer is the defendant cannot dispute any aspect…
WHEN THE WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: A RECAP
There has been some discussion on Twitter this morning about the issues that arise when witnesses make statements that are, to all intents and purposes, identical. It provides an opportunity to look at some cases on this issue. They make…
JUDICIAL INTERVENTION, INTERRUPTIONS AND HOT TUBBING: JUDICIAL LATITUDE IS NOT UNLIMITED
In Shaw -v- Grouby [2017] EWCA Civ 233 the Court of Appeal made some observations about the dangers of a judge getting too inquisitorial in the course of a trial, particularly in the course of cross-examination. “The judge intervened in…
PROVING THINGS 59: TO GET SPECIAL DAMAGES YOU HAVE TO PLEAD THEM AND PROVE THEM (EVEN IN DEFAMATION CASES)
In Lisle-Mainwaring -v- Associated Newspapers Ltd [2017] EWHC 543 (QB) Judge Parkes QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) declined to award the claimant special damages for financial outlay on the grounds that they were never properly…
PROVING THINGS 58 : FAILURE TO PROVE CAUSATION LEADS TO AWARD OF NOMINAL DAMAGES
For the third time in recent weeks I write about a case where a claimant has spent much time, energy (and no doubt money) in bringing an action but only recovered nominal damages. In Plantation Holdings (FZ) LLC -v- Dubai…
APPEAL JUDGE OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF KNOWLEDGE IN AN ACTION AGAINST THE MIB
In Whyatt -v- Powell & the Motor Insurers Bureau [2017] EWHC 484 (QB) Mr Justice Lewis overturned the findings of the trial judge that three claimants had knowledge that a driver was not insured. The judgment considers what inferences a…
PROVING THINGS 56: A JUDGE WILL NOT SPECULATE WHEN MATTERS COULD HAVE BEEN PROVEN: COUNTERCLAIM FAILS FOR LACK OF EVIDENCE
The judgment of Mr Recorder Douglas Campbell QC in Starbuck -v- Patsystems (UK) Limited [2017] EWHC 397 (IPEC) illustrates issues in relating to recollection and credibility, it is another example of a claim (counterclaim in this case) failing because of…
THE PROCESS OF TAKING A STATEMENT: EXPLORED IN DETAIL IN OPEN COURT
The judgment of Master Bowles in Wilson -v- Lassman [2017] EWHC 85 (Ch) contains a detailed consideration of the way in which witness evidence was obtained. It highlights the importance of having a careful record of the way in which…
WHERE DOES THE TRUTH LIE? GESTMIN IN THE FAMILY COURTS
This blog has looked at the “Gestmin” guidance many times. I am grateful to Lucy Reed for pointing out that it has been considered in the context of family law. In Lachaux -v- Lachaux [2017] EWHC 385 (Fam) Mr Justice…
A WITNESS IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE IS IN PURDAH: THE ROLE OF THE LAWYER
The Employment Tribunal decision in Chidzoy -v- BBC (available here) contains an important lesson to lawyers and litigants alike. A witness in the course of giving evidence is in “purdah” – in that they should not discuss the case with…
PROVING THINGS 55: I’LL SAY IT AGAIN: NO EVIDENCE – NO DAMAGES
The judgment of Mrs Justice Jefford in Kingsgate Development Projects Lt -v- Jordan [2017]EWHC 343 (TCC) is (yet) another example of a claimant asserting damages but there being no evidence to prove them. The claimant ended up with a judgment…
ALL THE WITNESSES SAY EXACTLY THE SAME THING 10 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE (AND NOT BELIEVED)
In Patel -v- Patel [2017] Andrew Simmonds QC (sitting as a judge of the High Court) was considering the credibility of witnesses. The case is an interesting read in that it sets out detail of some of the cross-examination. It…
PROVING THINGS 53: BECAUSE A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST SOME OF THE TIME IT DOESN’T MEAN THEY WERE DISHONEST ALL OF THE TIME
The case of Pemberton Greenish LLP -v- Henry [2017] EWHC 246 (QB) provides an interesting assessment of witness evidence and demonstrates the difficulty in proving dishonesty. Mr Justice Jeremy Baker held that the fact that a solicitor was negligent, breached…
ANODYNE WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHAT DOES IT TELL YOU WHEN A JUDGE PREFERS THE ORAL EVIDENCE OF A WITNESS- THAT CONTRADICTS THEIR WITNESS STATEMENT
There is an interesting observation in the judgment of Mrs Justice Rose in Singularis Holdings Ltd -v- Daiwa Capital Markets Europe Ltd [2017] EWHC 257 (Ch). It may well show much about the way in which witness statements are prepared. “……
EXPERTS AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO RELY ON EXPERT ALSO USED BY CLAIMANT
In Wheeldon Brothers Waste Limited -v- Millennium Insurance Company Limited [2017] EWHC 218 (TCC) Mr Justice Coulson allowed the defendant to rely on an expert that had also been instructed by the claimant. The circumstances are unusual and the case needs…
PROVING THINGS 52: SOLICITOR’S NEGLIGENCE ACTION FAILS ON ALL COUNTS: NO NEGLIGENCE AND NO LOSS
The judgment of HHH David Cooke today in Anderson Properties Ltd -v- Blyth Liggins [2017] EWHC 244 (Ch) is another example of a solicitor’s negligence case failing because of the absence of basic evidence in relation to liability, causation and damages….
THE MODERN JUDGE AND FACT FINDING: “TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION”
There is a full review of Sir Mark Hedley’s book The Modern Judge on Pink Tape, where Lucy Reed explains how the book mysteriously appeared in her hotel room the morning after the Family Law Awards. (Lucy speculates that Sir…
PROVING THINGS 51: NO EVIDENCE OF LOSS – NO DAMAGES: A LESSON TO SHARE
For the second time today we are looking at the judgment of Mrs Justice Proudman in Abbott -v- RCI Europe [2016] EWHC 2602 (Ch). This time in relation to the failure of the claimants to quantify or prove they had…
YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE IDENTICAL: NOW THAT IS A COINCIDENCE
There are, it seems, litigators out there who believe that the filing of numerous identical witness statements adds weight to their case. Advocates of this approach may want to read the judgment of Mrs Justice Proudman in Abbott -v-…
ADMISSIBILITY OF PREVIOUS JUDGMENT AS EVIDENCE OF FOREIGN LAW
In Joint Stock Company -v- Wood [2017] EWHC 150 (Ch) Mr Justice Warren considered whether a decision by judge in relation to foreign law was admissible as evidence. KEY POINTS A previous judgment where the judge considered and made findings…
BANKERS, WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CREDIBILITY: THE ENIGMATIC WITNESS
The judgment of Mr Justice Nugee in Clydesdale Bank plc -v- Stoke Place Hotel Ltd (in administration) [2017] EWHC 181 (Ch) also contains an analysis of a witness who was “something of an enigma” “Although a witness statement should be…
SOCIAL MEDIA: THE BLACK COUNTRY AND CRUISING FOR A FALL: DEFENDANT FILM THYSELF
It is easy to cause problems on social media. It is particularly easy to cause problems for yourself. We have looked several times at the role of social media in the courts. Another example can be found in the judgment…
PROVING THINGS 50: TO PROVE BREACH OF CONTRACT YOU FIRST HAVE TO PROVE THAT THERE WAS A CONTRACT
The judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Secker -v-Fairhill Property Services Ltd [2017] EWHC 69 (QB) may contain an important lesson about pleading as well as evidence. The claimant’s claim could not be put in negligence and her case based…
JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY: “THE MOST DIFFICULT AND OPINIONATED WITNESS I HAVE EVER HAD THE MISFORTUNE TO ENCOUNTER”
We have looked at the process of judicial assessment of witness credibility many times on this blog. Many of the robust judgments we have looked at pale into insignificance next to the judgment of His Honour Judge Hodge QC in…
PROVING THINGS 49: IT IS DIFFICULT TO PROVE DAMAGES WHEN THE OPINION EVIDENCE IN YOUR WITNESS STATEMENT HAS BEEN STRUCK OUT
The dangers of giving opinion evidence in witness statements are highlighted in the judgment today of Mr Justice Coulson in MacInnes -v- Gross [2017] EWHC 46 (QB). The opinion parts of the claimant’s witness statements were struck out. There was…
IF YOU DECIDE NOT TO TURN UP FOR COURT DON’T EXPECT MUCH SYMPATHY: COUNCIL TOLD TO GET ON ITS BIKE
The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Camden Borough Council -v- Humphreys [2017] EWCA Civ 24 illustrates the danger of a party deciding not to attend a hearing. THE CASE A recipient of a parking ticket, Mr Humphreys, had…
THE FIRST BUNDLE CASE FOR 2017: A BUNDLE THAT WAS NEVER DISCLOSED AND HAS GONE MISSING
At some time during the year there is bound to be a judgment about bundles. However the judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Iqbal -v-Iqbal [2017] EWCA Civ 19 contains a great surprise. Amongst other problems with the…
THOSE LETTERS: DEAR JUDGE – YOU WERE WRONG – PLEASE CHANGE YOUR MIND: ONLY IN THE MOST EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
There is an interesting postscript to the judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Goyal -v- Goyal [2017] EWFC 1. It relates to the practice of using letters to the judge in an attempt to alter the terms of a draft…
EVIDENCE, PROPORTIONALITY AND PREMIUMS II: NO SAVING OF ENERGY HERE
We have already looked at the judgment of Master Haworth in Savings Advice Limited -v- EDF Energy Customers Ltd [2017] EWHC B1 (Costs) in relation to the admissibility of evidence. Here we look at the judgment in relation to calculation of…
EXPERT WATCH II: ATTEMPTS TO SNEAK THE EVIDENCE IN
There are some examples of ingenious attempts to introduce expert evidence into cases. Mr Justice Arnold commented on this in his judgment in Teva UK Ltd -v- Gilead Sciences Inc [2017] EWHC 13 (Pat). A “factual” report from an expert is…
PROVING THINGS 47: FIRE IN THE LOFT: IT WASN’T THE MOUSE MAN AT ALL
The judgment of Mr Justice Coulson in Palmer -v- Nightingale [2016] EWHC 2800 (TCC) is another example of a claimant failing to prove their case. More curiously, in some respects, the claimant’s own evidence contradicted their case. “In circumstances where there…
You must be logged in to post a comment.