Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Credibility
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 13: WHAT IS MEANT BY WITNESS "CREDIBILITY"? WHY THIS IS OFTEN CENTRAL TO A LITIGATOR'S WORK

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 13: WHAT IS MEANT BY WITNESS “CREDIBILITY”? WHY THIS IS OFTEN CENTRAL TO A LITIGATOR’S WORK

September 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Many  civil cases  turn on  witness credibility, yet very little training and education is given to lawyers about assessing credibility.  Every litigator has to be able to make an assessment of this  when taking a case on; before issuing proceedings…

CIVIL LITIGATION AND THE MARTIAL ARTS: MCGANN -V- BISPING: ROUND 2: WHEN A WITNESS DISCUSSES THEIR EVIDENCE

December 20, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in McGann v Bisping [2017] EWHC 2951 (Comm) deals with numerous procedural issues, many of which arose in the course of the trial. We have looked at one of these already. The case also involved a witness, during the course…

THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 3: WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY

July 31, 2016 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This is the third in the series of posts on the  judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages; the second at the…

THE MITCHELL JUDGMENT 2: THE ROLE OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

December 2, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in the substantive Mitchell case has been examined several times on this blog. Not in relation to political and other ramifications but instead considering the judge’s analysis of the evidence.  The previous post looked at the difficulties posed…

THE MITCHELL CASE AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREDIBILITY, STRONG VIEWS AND RELIABILITY

November 27, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The Mitchell case was at the forefront of attention a year ago when the Court of Appeal set out its (apparently widely misunderstood) views on relief from sanctions. It is even more in the headlines today. The case has been…

WHICH WITNESS IS GOING TO BE BELIEVED? A HIGH COURT DECISION ASSESSING THE CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES

November 6, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

It is essential that litigators have a keen understanding of how witness evidence is likely to be assessed at trial.  Many trials take place precisely because there is a conflict of evidence between the witnesses.  An example of a close…

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

  • LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (5): “THE HEARING WAS A SALUTARY LESSON IN HOW AI MAY PROMPT LAY PERSONS TO SAY THE RIGHT THINGS IN PLEADINGS, BUT CANNOT FURNISH THE EVIDENCE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THOSE STATEMENTS”
  • THE DUTY OF FULL AND FRANK DISCLOSURE: USEFUL GUIDANCE AND AN ESSENTIAL CHECKLIST WHEN MAKING AN APPLICATION TO SERVE OUT…
  • A COURT SETS ASIDE AN ORDER MADE WITHOUT NOTICE: ANOTHER CASE THAT EMPHASISES THE IMPORTANCE OF FAIR PRESENTATION AT THESE APPLICATIONS: A LAWYER CANNOT SIMPLY PROMOTE A “CONSPIRACY THEORY” BUT MOST ACT OBJECTIVELY AND CAREFULLY
  • THE REPLY: THE THEME OF THE DAY: SIX USEFUL CHECKLISTS: MAKING SURE YOUR PLEADING DOESN’T FAIL THE BASIC TESTS
  • DRAFTING A DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM: SOME IMPORTANT POINTS: YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH CPR 16 AND DO IT FULLY AND PROPERLY

Top Posts

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
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...)
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"
LAWYERS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AVOIDING THE PITFALLS (3): AI AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: VERY DANGEROUS BEDFELLOWS: TWENTY KEY POINTS
CLAIM AGAINST A SOLICITOR WAS STRUCK OUT: THERE HAD BEEN NUMEROUS PROCEDURAL DEFAULT AND THESE WOULD HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN...

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.