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 9

SPECIAL MEASURES IN A CIVIL CASE: AN EXAMPLE OF HOW IT WORKS

September 27, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

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"

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”

September 25, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

BACK TO THE CASE OF WILSON: THIS TIME THE “CHERRY PICKING” EXPERT WHO VEERED INTO A PARTISAN APPROACH

September 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

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

WHEN AN EXPERT HAS “LOST ALL INDEPENDENCE AND OBJECTIVITY” – AND ADMITS SO IN COURT

September 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

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)

AN “UNRELIABLE” SCHEDULE LEADS TO A CLAIM FOR LOSS OF EARNINGS BEING STRUCK OUT (AND FOUR WEBINARS ON LOSS OF EARNINGS)

September 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

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

DON’T DISCLOSE COUNSEL’S ADVICE TO THE OTHER SIDE: A REPEAT IN RELATION TO AN ISSUE THAT IS STILL HAPPENING

September 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Personal Injury

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

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

September 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Witness statements

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

PREPARING TRIAL AND APPLICATION BUNDLES: A LITIGATOR’S SURVIVAL GUIDE: WEBINAR 4th DECEMBER 2024

September 16, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Members Content, Webinar

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)

LATE AND “HAPHAZARD” SERVICE OF TRIAL BUNDLES LEADS TO WASTED COSTS ORDER AGAINST CLAIMANT’S SOLICITORS (ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS)

September 16, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Bundles, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content, Wasted Costs

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

PROVING THINGS 242: THE CLAIMANT WHO WAS GIVEN A SECOND CHANCE TO PROVE HIS DAMAGES CLAIM

September 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

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

WHEN A PARTY IS BANKRUPT: WEBINAR ON THE 16th SEPTEMBER 2024: AN IMPORTANT TOPIC THAT MAY HELP FLOAT YOUR BOAT

September 10, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Insolvency, Members Content, Personal Injury, Professional negligence,, Webinar

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

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

September 5, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

“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

September 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

MAKING APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT: A PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE: WEBINAR 10th SEPTEMBER 2024

September 2, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Webinar

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"

A TRIAL BUNDLE THAT WAS A “CHAOTIC MESS”; NON COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS AND “PROCEDURAL TRENCH WARFARE”

August 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Experts, Members Content

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

VALUATION EXPERTS SHOULD SHOW THEIR CALCULATIONS: ESTIMATING A VALUE AND WORKING BACKWARDS TO JUSTIFY THAT DOES NOT FIND FAVOUR WITH THE COURT

August 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

WITNESS STATEMENTS, WITNESSES, EVIDENCE AND PSYCHOLOGY: GUIDANCE FROM THE EAST: ANOTHER EXAMPLE FROM A DECADE AGO THAT REMAINS RELEVANT

August 27, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

A WORKING EXAMPLE OF THE DANGERS OF NOT TAKING A FULL WITNESS STATEMENT: DISASTER CAN STRIKE: A DECADE ON AND THIS CASE IS STILL RELEVANT

A WORKING EXAMPLE OF THE DANGERS OF NOT TAKING A FULL WITNESS STATEMENT: DISASTER CAN STRIKE: A DECADE ON AND THIS CASE IS STILL RELEVANT

August 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

One case I regularly refer to when speaking, or writing, about taking witness statements is the decision of Judge Keyser Q.C. In Kellie & Kellie -v- Wheatley & Lloyd Architects Ltd [2014] EWHC 2866(TCC). This case  gives a working example…

NO "VYING AND REVYING": WITNESS STATEMENTS, EVIDENCE AND LOTS OF OTHER MATERIAL BESIDES: AFTER 287 YEARS OF JUDICIAL PROMPTING HAVE PRACTITIONERS GOT THE MESSAGE?

NO “VYING AND REVYING”: WITNESS STATEMENTS, EVIDENCE AND LOTS OF OTHER MATERIAL BESIDES: AFTER 287 YEARS OF JUDICIAL PROMPTING HAVE PRACTITIONERS GOT THE MESSAGE?

August 22, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

Anyone involved in civil litigation will spend a great deal of their time reading witness “evidence” which, in reality, is no such thing.  Witness statements tend to be seen as an opportunity to put forward opinions, submissions and innuendo. As…

PROVING THINGS 241: "WHICH WITNESS'S ACCOUNT IS PREFERRED?": CONTEMPORARY EVIDENCE IS BEST

PROVING THINGS 241: “WHICH WITNESS’S ACCOUNT IS PREFERRED?”: CONTEMPORARY EVIDENCE IS BEST

August 16, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In Gadsby v Hayes [2024] EWHC 2142 (KB) Ms Clare Ambrose (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the evidence of witnesses in a case where the accident had happened ten years previously.  The accounts given near the time…

NON-COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS (AGAIN): THE SOLICITOR'S STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WAS "FALSE":

NON-COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS (AGAIN): THE SOLICITOR’S STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE WAS “FALSE”:

August 15, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

For the third time this week I find myself writing about judicial criticisms of the way in which witness statements have been prepared.  This case has by far the most excoriating comments. In Fulstow & Anor v Francis [2024] EWHC…

THREE WEBINARS: MAKING APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT; INSOLVENCY AND SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER

THREE WEBINARS: MAKING APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT; INSOLVENCY AND SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LAWYER

August 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

In September and October there are a number of webinars relating to procedure and evidence. Firstly on the essential issue (but often overlooked) elements and rules relating to making applications to the court; secondly on insolvency and personal injury and…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: PD57AC "MORE HONOURED IN THE BREACH THAN THE OBSERVANCE": AND THIS HAS CONSEQUENCES

WITNESS STATEMENTS: PD57AC “MORE HONOURED IN THE BREACH THAN THE OBSERVANCE”: AND THIS HAS CONSEQUENCES

August 12, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

In  KSY Juice Blends UK Ltd v Citrosuco GmbH [2024] EWHC 2098 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) observed that the requirements for drafting witness statements in PD57AC were “more honoured in the breach than…

SELF PROTECTION FOR LITIGATION LAWYERS - A RECAP: WITNESS STATEMENTS UNDER SCRUTINY

SELF PROTECTION FOR LITIGATION LAWYERS – A RECAP: WITNESS STATEMENTS UNDER SCRUTINY

August 9, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

A report in Litigation Futures in August 2016 illustrates the need for “self protection” by lawyers in . The headline says it all “Insurance Fraudster who tried to blame his solicitor jailed for 18 months”.   “IT WAS ALL MY…

"TRENCH WARFARE OF THE MOST ATTRITIONAL KIND": ALLEGATIONS OF NON-DISCLOSURE AND THE LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURNS: "QUALITY NOT QUANTITY SHOULD BE THE WATCHWORD"

“TRENCH WARFARE OF THE MOST ATTRITIONAL KIND”: ALLEGATIONS OF NON-DISCLOSURE AND THE LAW OF DIMINISHING RETURNS: “QUALITY NOT QUANTITY SHOULD BE THE WATCHWORD”

August 8, 2024 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Appeals, Applications, Members Content

There are some interesting observations in the Court of Appeal judgment today in MEX Group Worldwide Limited v Stewart Owen Ford & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 959 about the way cases should be presented in relation to allegations of non-disclosure.  The Court…

PROVING THINGS 239: THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING ABLE TO PROVE THE DATE THAT VIDEOS WERE TAKEN

PROVING THINGS 239: THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING ABLE TO PROVE THE DATE THAT VIDEOS WERE TAKEN

August 5, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

We are looking at one particular factual issue that arose in Wye Valley NHS Trust v Murphy [2024] EWHC 1912 (KB). The applicant Trust was unable to prove the date that various videos were taken. Consequently they were unable to…

HARASSMENT PROCEEDINGS: PART 7 AND NOT PART 8 SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED

HARASSMENT PROCEEDINGS: PART 7 AND NOT PART 8 SHOULD HAVE BEEN USED

July 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There are often procedural difficulties when a claimant bringing a claim for harassment has to use the Part 8 procedure (as this is prescribed by CPR 65.28(1)(a)).  However as the judgment of Aidan Eardley KC in  Pattinson v Winsor [2024]…

“THE EXTENT OF EVIDENCE… WENT FAR BEYOND THAT PERMITTED BY THE RULES IN RELATION TO EXPERT EVIDENCE”: COMMENTS FROM ANTOTHER JURISDICTION

July 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Education, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

On the rare occasions we look at procedure in jurisdictions outside England and Wales it is often in relation to expert evidence.  Other jurisdictions have similar issues in relation to experts, particularly argumentative experts.  An example can be seen in…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE SERVED THREE WEEKS LATE: SOMETHING ABOUT THE DANGERS OF “CUT AND PASTE” SUBMISSIONS TOO…

July 26, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In  Seaton Management Ltd v Evans-Jones [2024] EWHC 1883 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber refused the respondent’s application for relief from sanctions when a witness statement was served three weeks late.   “The matters addressed in the Respondent’s skeleton argument on…

RECENT CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION - WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 30th JULY 2024

RECENT CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION – WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 30th JULY 2024

July 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

This webinar looks at recent cases in relation to liability, quantum and damages involving fatal accident victims.  It enables us to spend enough time looking at each case in detail, in particular the evidence that was adduced and the conclusions…

COURT MADE PEREMPTORY ORDER THAT CLAIMANT PAY COSTS: ARTICLE 6 RIGHTS NOT INFRINGED

COURT MADE PEREMPTORY ORDER THAT CLAIMANT PAY COSTS: ARTICLE 6 RIGHTS NOT INFRINGED

July 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Costs, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Khokan v Nirjhor [2024] EWHC 1872 (KB) Mrs Justice Hill granted the defendant’s application for a peremptory order following the claimant’s failure to pay costs ordered against him at an interlocutory hearing.  The judge refused the claimant’s application for…

WRITING INFLAMMATORY THINGS IN COURT DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: IT NEVER, EVER, HELPS

WRITING INFLAMMATORY THINGS IN COURT DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE: IT NEVER, EVER, HELPS

July 22, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are looking at the judgment of HHJ Edward Hess in  TM v KM [2022] EWFC 155 for two reasons: firstly the costs involved; secondly the judge’s observations about the unattractiveness of putting personal pejorative remarks in court documents.   There…

DEFENDANT DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL: APPLICATION FOR REMOTE HEARING NOT ALLOWED: JUDGMENT ENTERED: DEFENDANT'S APPEAL UNSUCESSFUL

DEFENDANT DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL: APPLICATION FOR REMOTE HEARING NOT ALLOWED: JUDGMENT ENTERED: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL UNSUCESSFUL

July 19, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Sobowale v Lendinvest Capital SARL [2024] EWHC 1829 (Ch) Nicola Rushton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) dismissed a defendant’s appeal against judgment being entered against him when he failed to attend a trial.   “There was no…

WHEN EXPERTS KNOW EACH OTHER AND SPEAK AT THE SAME CONFERENCES: ATTACKS ON THE CREDIBILITY OF THE EXPERTS WERE REJECTED

WHEN EXPERTS KNOW EACH OTHER AND SPEAK AT THE SAME CONFERENCES: ATTACKS ON THE CREDIBILITY OF THE EXPERTS WERE REJECTED

July 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some interesting observations about expert witness evidence in the judgment in Biggadike v El Farra & Anor [2024] EWHC 1688 (KB)   Firstly in relation to the attendance at clinical seminars (during the course of the trial). Secondly in relation to…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, EVIDENCE AND DISCLOSURE: WHEN THE JUDGE FINDS THAT THE MEDICAL NOTES ARE NOT ACCURATE: “A CONTRIVED AND FALSE PIECE OF EVIDENCE”

July 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Disclosure, Members Content

In Biggadike v El Farra & Anor [2024] EWHC 1688 (KB) HHJ Carmel Wall (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that annotations made to medical records were not, in fact, contemporaneous.  She rejected the second defendant’s evidence based on…

RESPONDENT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE WAS SERVED LATE: TO SHUT IT OUT FROM PRESENTING ITS BEST EVIDENCE WOULD BE "WHOLLY UNJUST AND DISPROPORTIONATE"

RESPONDENT GRANTED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE WAS SERVED LATE: TO SHUT IT OUT FROM PRESENTING ITS BEST EVIDENCE WOULD BE “WHOLLY UNJUST AND DISPROPORTIONATE”

July 17, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In Tanfield & Anor v Meadowbrook Montessori Ltd [2024] EWHC 1759 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber allowed a respondent’s application for relief from sanctions when witness evidence was served late.  The Denton test was considered and, although the respondent could not…

WITNESS STATEMENTS A GUIDE FOR GRADE C FEE EARNERS (AND THOSE WHO SUPERVISE THEM): WEBINAR 18th JULY 2024

WITNESS STATEMENTS A GUIDE FOR GRADE C FEE EARNERS (AND THOSE WHO SUPERVISE THEM): WEBINAR 18th JULY 2024

July 16, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

On the 18th July I am giving a webinar “Drafting witness statements in high value personal injury claims: A guide for Grade C fee earners (and those who supervise them)”, booking details are available here.     THE REASON FOR THE WEBINAR…

FOUR WEBINARS ON FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION: CORONERS; RECENT CASES; CHILDREN AND FATAL CLAIMS & DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH

FOUR WEBINARS ON FATAL ACCIDENT LITIGATION: CORONERS; RECENT CASES; CHILDREN AND FATAL CLAIMS & DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH

July 15, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Courses, Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

There are four webinars over the next  four weeks dealing with key elements of fatal accident litigation. An introduction to the coroner’s court for personal injury and clinical negligence lawyers 23rd July 2024 This webinar is an introduction to the…

CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN SERVING NOTICE OF NON-ADMISSION OF AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: THE APPLICATION WAS LATE, AND THE ARGUMENT WAS HOPELESS

CLAIMANT REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS IN SERVING NOTICE OF NON-ADMISSION OF AUTHENTICITY OF DOCUMENTS: THE APPLICATION WAS LATE, AND THE ARGUMENT WAS HOPELESS

July 15, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Invest Bank PSC v El-Husseini & Ors [2024] EWHC 1804 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver refused the claimant bank’s application for relief from sanctions when it served a notice of a notice to prove the authenticity of a document.  The…

COST BITES 159: DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT'S DAMAGES: THE GOLDEN RULE - THAT THE CLIENT SHOULD BE KEPT INFORMED

COST BITES 159: DEDUCTING COSTS FROM THE CLIENT’S DAMAGES: THE GOLDEN RULE – THAT THE CLIENT SHOULD BE KEPT INFORMED

July 5, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking again at the judgment in  St. James v Wilkin Chapman LLP [2024] EWHC 1716 (KB).  The judge considered the question of whether the client had been informed that the budget had been exceeded and that the solicitors…

CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EXAGGERATING SYMPTOMS IS PLAINLY DISHONEST

CLAIMANT FOUND TO BE FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EXAGGERATING SYMPTOMS IS PLAINLY DISHONEST

July 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury, Uncategorized

We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Karen Walden-Smith in Hamed -v- Ministry of Justice (County Court in Cambridge – 7th June 2024). The judge found that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest in the presentation of their symptoms.  This…

WITNESS STATEMENTS DRAFTED BY LAWYERS: ANOTHER LOOK BACK

WITNESS STATEMENTS DRAFTED BY LAWYERS: ANOTHER LOOK BACK

June 27, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Yesterday I wrote about the large numbers of posts about expert witnesses on this blog. These are probably matched by the cases that deal with judicial criticism of witness statements. Again this is a topic where, in choosing one post,…

EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN EXAMPLE OF AN EXPERT BEING UNBALANCED (FROM 2015).

EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN EXAMPLE OF AN EXPERT BEING UNBALANCED (FROM 2015).

June 25, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Looking back at previous posts there are, numerous, indeed hundreds, where the courts have considered the role of experts.  The cases that appear on this blog tend to be where judges have found the experts wanting.  It almost feels unfair…

EXPERT EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL STATE WHY THE JUDGE SHOULD BE WARY OF RELYING ON SCIENTIFIC PAPERS

EXPERT EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL STATE WHY THE JUDGE SHOULD BE WARY OF RELYING ON SCIENTIFIC PAPERS

June 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In D and A (Fact-Finding : Research Literature) [2024] EWCA Civ 663 the Court of Appeal set out a clear warning about the dangers of trial judges analysing research literature in detail. The literature should be read through the prism…

THE ELEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF: A LOOK BACK TO THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY

THE ELEVENTH ANNIVERSARY OF CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF: A LOOK BACK TO THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY

June 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Fork handles, Members Content

Today marks the 11th anniversary of the setting up of this blog.  Rather than review the previous decade I thought it would be a good time to repeat what I said on the first anniversary.  The growth and size of…

ANOTHER BLOG FROM THE PAST: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "EVIDENCE" AND "SUBMISSIONS": A PROBLEM THAT PERSISTS TODAY

ANOTHER BLOG FROM THE PAST: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN “EVIDENCE” AND “SUBMISSIONS”: A PROBLEM THAT PERSISTS TODAY

June 21, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

As part of the 11th anniversary process I am looking at a blog that was written in June 2014. “WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE FOR FACTS: KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS (AND WHY IT MATTERS)”. It is very interesting to…

THE HIGH COURT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR AN APPEAL FROM A CIRCUIT JUDGE WHEN THAT DECISION WAS ITSELF AN APPEAL: DECISION ON THIS POINT

THE HIGH COURT DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION TO HEAR AN APPEAL FROM A CIRCUIT JUDGE WHEN THAT DECISION WAS ITSELF AN APPEAL: DECISION ON THIS POINT

June 17, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is always important to remember that appeals from Circuit Judges, which are themselves a decision made on appeal, can only be heard by the Court of Appeal.  In Jarvis v Metro Taxis Ltd [2024] EWHC 1452 (KB) Mr Justice…

WHEN THE JUDGE PREFERS ONE EXPERT WITNESS OVER ANOTHER: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE EXAMPLE

WHEN THE JUDGE PREFERS ONE EXPERT WITNESS OVER ANOTHER: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE EXAMPLE

June 13, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Woods v Doncaster And Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2024] EWHC 1432 (KB) Mrs Justice Lambert preferred the claimant’s expert evidence to that that of the defendant. This was not because either expert was unduly partisan. Rather it…

APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS JUDGE'S REFUSAL TO RELY ON OWN EXPERT WHEN HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: THE "STAGGERED APPROACH" IS IMPORTANT

APPEAL COURT OVERTURNS JUDGE’S REFUSAL TO RELY ON OWN EXPERT WHEN HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: THE “STAGGERED APPROACH” IS IMPORTANT

June 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Seneschall v Trisant Foods Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1380 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson overturned a decision whereby a party was refused permission to rely on their own expert report.  The judgment is important because it emphasises the…

UNCONTROVERTED EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO OVERRIDE THE UNQUESTIONED REPORT: GRIFFITHS -v- TUI LEADS TO CLAIMANTS BEING SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL

UNCONTROVERTED EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO OVERRIDE THE UNQUESTIONED REPORT: GRIFFITHS -v- TUI LEADS TO CLAIMANTS BEING SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL

June 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Jatinder Paul from Irwin Mitchell for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Humphreys in the Wrexham County Court.  The report involves a personal injury case alleging negligence which led to food poisoning which…

← Previous 1 … 8 9 10 … 26 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

  • SERVICE POINTS 36 : “THIS IS AN AREA OF UNDOUBTED STRICTNESS”: ERRORS IN SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM WERE FATAL TO THE CLAIM
  • COST BITES 377: THE COURT WOULD NOT STAY A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PENDING THE DEFENDANT’S APPEAL AND/OR APPLICATION FOR A RIGHT TO SET OFF THEIR OWN COSTS (WHY WHAT IS TAKEN OUT OF DRAFT ORDER CAN BE AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT IS LEFT IN…)
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 12: WHAT IS A CLAIMANT TO DO ABOUT CRU IF THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND NOT RESPONDING?
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP AGAIN (GUESS THE REASON…): YOUR STATEMENTS DID COMPLY WITH PD57AC SO WE ARE JUST GOING TO IGNORE THE ERRANT PARTS
  • SERVICE POINTS 35: HOT OFF THE PRESS: THE HIGH COURT UPHOLDS INITIAL FINDING THAT AN ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED AND SUBSQUENTLY AMENDED CLAIM FORM DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RE-SEALED PRIOR TO SERVICE

Top Posts

  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 12: WHAT IS A CLAIMANT TO DO ABOUT CRU IF THE DEFENDANT IS NOT INSURED AND NOT RESPONDING?
  • SERVICE POINTS 36 : "THIS IS AN AREA OF UNDOUBTED STRICTNESS": ERRORS IN SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM WERE FATAL TO THE CLAIM
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: COMMERCIAL LITIGATORS ON THE NAUGHTY STEP AGAIN (GUESS THE REASON...): YOUR STATEMENTS DID COMPLY WITH PD57AC SO WE ARE JUST GOING TO IGNORE THE ERRANT PARTS
  • SERVICE POINTS 35: HOT OFF THE PRESS: THE HIGH COURT UPHOLDS INITIAL FINDING THAT AN ELECTRONICALLY ISSUED AND SUBSQUENTLY AMENDED CLAIM FORM DOES NOT HAVE TO BE RE-SEALED PRIOR TO SERVICE
  • COST BITES 377: THE COURT WOULD NOT STAY A PAYMENT ON ACCOUNT PENDING THE DEFENDANT'S APPEAL AND/OR APPLICATION FOR A RIGHT TO SET OFF THEIR OWN COSTS (WHY WHAT IS TAKEN OUT OF DRAFT ORDER CAN BE AS IMPORTANT AS WHAT IS LEFT IN...)

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.