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 28
COURT CANNOT RE-OPEN "FINAL JUDGMENT": ISSUES RELATING TO DEFENDANT'S CAPACITY: EVESHAM --v- WERRETT CONSIDERED

COURT CANNOT RE-OPEN "FINAL JUDGMENT": ISSUES RELATING TO DEFENDANT'S CAPACITY: EVESHAM –v- WERRETT CONSIDERED

April 20, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Risks of litigation

In the judgment today  in Eversham & Pershore Housing Association Ltd -v- Werrett [2015] EWHC 1060 (QB) Mr Justice Nicol held that the court could not re-open a decision because of later evidence in relation to the defendant’s capacity. THE…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AVOIDING JAIL: ARE YOU PROTECTING YOUR CLIENTS AND PROTECTING YOURSELF?

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AVOIDING JAIL: ARE YOU PROTECTING YOUR CLIENTS AND PROTECTING YOURSELF?

April 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In the recent case of Hughmans -v- Dunhill [2015] EWHC 716 (Ch) an interesting point arose about the drafting of a witness statement when a (former) client alleged that it had largely been drafted by her (former) solicitor. The assertion…

THE "URGENT NEED FOR COMMERCIAL PRACTITIONERS TO BRING A SENSE OF PROPORTION" TO LITIGATION: EVIDENCE NEEDED IN WHEN ARGUING SECURITY FOR COSTS "STIFLES" AN ACTION.

April 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content

In Kazakhstan Kagazy Plc -v- Baglan Zhunus [2015] EWHC 996 Mr Justice Walker had strong words to say, and constructive guidance to give, in relation to some aspects of commercial litigation.  The case further serves as a reminder of the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, EXHIBITS AND NOT MAKING AN EXHIBITION OF YOURSELF: THE OFTEN IGNORED RULES ABOUT EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

April 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Liability, Members Content

Your life will not be complete unless you have read a post about exhibits to witness statements. The “exhibiting” of documents is common. It is surprising how common it is for the exhibit, and the witness statement, to fail to…

PLEADING, PARTICULARITY, SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND STRIKING OUT: WAIT UNTIL AFTER DISCLOSURE

April 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Dellal -v- Dellal [2015] EWHC 907 (Fam) Mr Justice Mostyn made some important observations about the need for particularity in pleading THE CASE The claimant was bringing an action  under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975…

CHANGES TO THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOLS THAT WE KNOW ABOUT: LOW VALUE ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS

April 7, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Costs, Damages, Expert evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Rule Changes, Useful links

Important changes have been made to the Pre-Action Protocols which came into force yesterday. At the moment the whereabout of the the Protocols is a mystery in that they have not been published generally. However there are some changes to…

FATAL ACCIDENT AND FATAL PLEADINGS: THE NEED TO PLEAD AND PROVE FOREIGN LAW

April 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Statements of Case

On the face of it the case of Bianco -v- Bennett [2015] EWHC 626 (QB) is simply a case about fatal accidents. I was going to discuss it solely on the Fatal Accident Blog. On close reading, however, it reveals…

LAY EVIDENCE AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: MORE IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER

March 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Wake -v- Johnson [2015] EWHC 276(QB) HH Judge Collender QC (Sitting as Judge of the High Court) conducted a critical analysis of the lay evidence and expert evidence when dismissing a clinical negligence claim against a GP.  There are…

TROUBLESOME BUNDLES YET AGAIN: MR JUSTICE EDER SPEAKS OUT ON WASTEFUL BUNDLES IN THE COMMERCIAL COURT

March 30, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The question of bundles was raised by Mr Justice Eder in Taberna Europe -v- Selskabet [2015] EWHC 871 (Comm).  This is hardly a new complaint and appears across the board in all jurisdictions. (There are now 16 posts on this…

WHY YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS SHOULD BE MADE IN CHELSEA: MAKING FIRST HAND STATEMENTS AVOIDS PENALTIES

March 28, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

The post earlier this week in relation to the need for full disclosure on without notice injunctions also highlighted the need for first hand evidence. There are real dangers when a solicitor signs a witness statement. That principle was highlighted…

SOLICITOR FOUND TO HAVE DELIBERATELY MISLED THE COURT: BOREH -v- DJIBOUTI

March 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

In Boreh -v- Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux made a clear and unequivocal finding that a solicitor had deliberately misled the court. This led to the setting aside of the injunction that the clients had…

DECIDING CASES ON PAPER: WOODLANDS, EVIDENCE & DECIDING CASES "ONLINE"

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The decision in Woodland -v- Maxwell looked at in an earlier blog is interesting because it is one of the rare cases where the Court of Appeal carried out a (brief) analysis of the evidence in the case more than…

WITHDRAWING FROM ADMISSIONS, MISTAKES AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES

February 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a report on Lawtel of the decision of Judge Bidder QC in Moore -v- Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust [12/02/15].* This case demonstrates some of the difficult issues in relation to the law of withdrawing from admissions. THE…

THE MITCHELL JUDGMENT 3: WHY MR MITCHELL WASN'T TELLING LIES AND P.C. ROWLAND WAS TELLING THE TRUTH

December 6, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This blog has  looked at the fact finding process in the Mitchell judgment several times already.  Here I want to look at the issue of the “truth”. This is an issue that has wider implications for those involved in the…

INDEMNITY COSTS, COSTS BUDGETING AND WITNESS STATEMENTS:INTERVIEW ON KELLIE -v- LLOYD

September 18, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Useful links, Witness statements

There is a feature on the Lexis Nexis Dispute Resolution Blog where I answer questions about the implications of the judgment in Kellie and another v Wheatley & Lloyd Architects Ltd [2014] EWHC 2886 (TCC), [2014] All ER (D) 152 (Aug)…

← Previous 1 … 27 28

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

  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A LITIGATOR MAKES A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENT: A USEFUL CHECKLIST ON THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
  • EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
  • EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN
  • PERSONAL INJURY MATTERS 17 (1): LIABILITY CATCHUP (1): PUB OPERATOR IS NOT VICARIOUSLY LIABLE FOR DOORMEN’S ACTS: A CONCLUSION REACHED “WITH REGRET”
  • COST BITES 411: HOW DOES A COURT DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF AN INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS WHEN THE CASE HAS NOT BEEN BUDGETED? SHOULD A PAYMENT BE ORDERED AT ALL?

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

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.