Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Evidence » Page 5
WHEN WITNESSES TOTALLY CHANGE THEIR EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: A CASE IN POINT

WHEN WITNESSES TOTALLY CHANGE THEIR EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: A CASE IN POINT

April 5, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In  Advantage Insurance Company Ltd v Harris [2024] EWHC 626 (KB) HHJ Russen KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that a claimant in a personal injury action had been in contempt of court for making false statements.  It…

DEFENDANT FAILS TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE: PEREMPTORY ORDER MADE AND BREACHED: APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FAILED: APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL

DEFENDANT FAILS TO GIVE FULL DISCLOSURE: PEREMPTORY ORDER MADE AND BREACHED: APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS FAILED: APPEAL UNSUCCESSFUL

March 25, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Winchester Park Ltd v 1 Palace Gate Freehold Ltd [2024] EWHC 661 (Ch) Mr Justice Adam Johnson dismissed a defendant’s appeal on the issue of relief from sanctions. He held that the judge below was entitled to refuse to…

A SERIES OF FOUR WEBINARS TO TAKE YOU THROUGH LAW AND PRACTICE RELATING TO FATAL ACCIDENTS

March 17, 2024 · by gexall · in Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Webinar

In March and April 2024 I am presenting four webinars which take practitioners through the major issues relating to law and procedure in Fatal Accident Act claims.  All of those who subscribe to the webinars will receive comprehensive questionnaires for…

COURT ORDERS DISCLOSURE AGAINST HEALTHCARE SAFETY INVESTIGATION BOARD

COURT ORDERS DISCLOSURE AGAINST HEALTHCARE SAFETY INVESTIGATION BOARD

February 26, 2024 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Disclosure, Members Content, Uncategorized

In Turner & Anor Sheffield Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Anor [2023] EWHC 3452 (KB) Master Brown allowed an application by the claimant for disclosure of statements made to the Healthcare Investigation Board. “A trial judge faced with deciding…

PROVING THINGS 237: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE, FAILS TO PROVE IT HAD SUFFERED DAMAGES HAD IT SUCCEEDED (SOMETHING ABOUT EXPERT EVIDENCE TOO)

PROVING THINGS 237: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE, FAILS TO PROVE IT HAD SUFFERED DAMAGES HAD IT SUCCEEDED (SOMETHING ABOUT EXPERT EVIDENCE TOO)

February 13, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Hamsard One Thousand And Forty-Three Ltd v AE Insurance Brokers Ltd [2024] EWHC 262 (Comm) the claimant failed to establish its case.  The judgment shows  many issues with the claimant’s evidence, in particular the problems that flowed from issues…

CHANGES TO THE FIXED COSTS RULES 2: 20 PAGES IN AN EXPERT'S REPORT DOES NOT MEAN 20 PAGES

CHANGES TO THE FIXED COSTS RULES 2: 20 PAGES IN AN EXPERT’S REPORT DOES NOT MEAN 20 PAGES

February 9, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Another change being introduced on the 6th April 2024 is a change (or possibly clarification) in relation to to the number of pages in an expert report in the Intermediate Track.  The substantive report is still limited to 20 pages….

THIS WAS NOT AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO AN ORDER: COURT WILL DETERMINE THE SUBSTANTIVE DISPUTE INSTEAD

THIS WAS NOT AN APPROPRIATE CASE TO ADD A PENAL NOTICE TO AN ORDER: COURT WILL DETERMINE THE SUBSTANTIVE DISPUTE INSTEAD

February 7, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

In Wintermute Trading Ltd v Terraform Labs Pte Ltd [2024] EWHC 141 (KB) Mr Justice Lavender considered whether it was appropriate, on the facts of this case, to add a penal notice to an order for disclosure. He held that…

A DEFENDANT CANNOT SIMPLY SEEK TO SET ASIDE THE CONSEQUENCES OF A DEBARRING ORDER: AN APPLICATION SOUNDLY REFUSED

A DEFENDANT CANNOT SIMPLY SEEK TO SET ASIDE THE CONSEQUENCES OF A DEBARRING ORDER: AN APPLICATION SOUNDLY REFUSED

January 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

In Al Saud v Gibbs [2024] EWHC 123 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver refused a defendant’s application to set aside a debarring order so that they could be involved in the trial of the action.  The judgment contains important observations on…

THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT TRIAL WAS DIFFERENT TO THE PLEADED CASE AND THE WITNESS STATEMENTS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF WHY CARE IS NEEDED

January 22, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Earlier this month I posted an article on the need for “self protection” by lawyers when drafting witness statements.  An example of why care is needed can be seen in the judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies, sitting as a High…

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: ESSENTIAL POINTS FOR PRACTITIONERS AND EXPERTS: WEBINAR 24th JANUARY 2024

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: ESSENTIAL POINTS FOR PRACTITIONERS AND EXPERTS: WEBINAR 24th JANUARY 2024

January 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

Keen readers will note that already this week there have been two cases reported on this blog where the conduct or “expertise” of experts have been subject to judicial criticism.  Issues relating to expert evidence in litigation have been a…

EXPERTS NOT QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE MATTERS THEY DID: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION

EXPERTS NOT QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE MATTERS THEY DID: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION

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

Another example of expert evidence going awry can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Balachandra v The General Dental Council [2024] EWHC 18 . The experts in question were giving evidence in relation to matters that…

MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 2: THE JUDGE'S VIEW ON WITNESS CREDIBILITY

MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE 2: THE JUDGE’S VIEW ON WITNESS CREDIBILITY

January 10, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

I am repeating a post first written in 2019.  Matters that are in the public consciousness now were very much in the consciousness of the legal profession then. This post dealt with the trial judge’s view of the credibility of…

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 11th JANUARY: PART OF THE DAMAGES SERIES 2024

DAMAGES FOR PAIN AND SUFFERING: WEBINAR 11th JANUARY: PART OF THE DAMAGES SERIES 2024

January 2, 2024 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

On the 11th January 2024 I am presenting a webinar on Damages for pain and suffering.  This is a  part of a series of webinars looking at the basic elements of major heads of damages for personal injury, with a…

MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE: LOOKING BACK TO THE CASE OF THE YEAR 2019

MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE: LOOKING BACK TO THE CASE OF THE YEAR 2019

January 2, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Yesterday I noticed that a post I had written in 2019 was suddenly gaining a lot of readers.  I suspect that this was due to the power of television.  Not that the blog was being advertised, but that the series…

CIVIL LITIGATION 2023: A BRIEF REVIEW

CIVIL LITIGATION 2023: A BRIEF REVIEW

December 27, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

I am not sure whether the facts and figures from this site can show any major trends in civil litigation.   Here is a quick look back at some numbers from 2023.   MOST VIEWED POSTS: THE TOP 10 (to date)…

A CLAIMANT, ALLEGING FRAUD, IS NOT ENTITLED TO DELIBERATELY BREACH A COURT ORDER AND THE RULES OF COURT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT GIVES LITIGATORS MUCH TO THINK ABOUT

A CLAIMANT, ALLEGING FRAUD, IS NOT ENTITLED TO DELIBERATELY BREACH A COURT ORDER AND THE RULES OF COURT: HIGH COURT JUDGMENT GIVES LITIGATORS MUCH TO THINK ABOUT

December 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Conduct, Disclosure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Statements of Case

Those who draft pleadings, particularly those alleging fraud and misconduct, have much to learn from the judgment of Mr Justice Johnson in AXA Insurance UK PLC v Kryeziu & Ors [2023] EWHC 3233 (KB). The fact that a party is…

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: WEBINAR 24TH JANUARY 2024: ESSENTIAL ISSUES FOR ALL LITIGATORS AND EXPERTS

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: WEBINAR 24TH JANUARY 2024: ESSENTIAL ISSUES FOR ALL LITIGATORS AND EXPERTS

November 28, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

Over the course of 2023 we saw many cases in which the conduct of experts and those who instruct them came under close scrutiny  and criticism in the courts.  I am presenting a webinar on the 24th January 2024 reviewing…

COST BITES 119: COSTS BUDGETING: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO VARY ITS BUDGET TO INCLUDE COSTS ALREADY INCURRED OBTAINING SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE

COST BITES 119: COSTS BUDGETING: DEFENDANT ALLOWED TO VARY ITS BUDGET TO INCLUDE COSTS ALREADY INCURRED OBTAINING SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE

November 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Personal Injury

There is a report of an interesting decision of Master McCloud in Yelland -v- Space Engineering Services Ltd [2023] EWHC 2823 (KB).   The report is from Sean Linley of Carter Burnett and can be read here. There is a link to…

DECISION TO DISMISS CLAIM BECAUSE OF ABSENCE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD ON APPEAL:

DECISION TO DISMISS CLAIM BECAUSE OF ABSENCE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD ON APPEAL:

November 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are looking at the second part of the decision in  Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB). The post yesterday looked at the decision in Doyle. Here we look at the judgment in Rowe, the other case…

COST BITES 110: THE IMPORTANCE OF ATTENDANCE NOTES: COUNSEL'S FEES INCLUDED

COST BITES 110: THE IMPORTANCE OF ATTENDANCE NOTES: COUNSEL’S FEES INCLUDED

November 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Case Management, Costs, Members Content

In  Allseas Group SA, R (On the Application Of) v Sultana [2023] EWHC 2731 (SCCO) Costs Judge Leonard emphasised the point that records of conferences and important steps in a case are important in relation to the assessment of costs….

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON'T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON'T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON’T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON’T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

October 31, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in  Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB) shows a surprising set of facts when an expert wrote directly to the court.  The expert made it clear that he was not…

WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR...

WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR…

October 30, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Early next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages.  The series looks at the  major heads of damages for personal injury and clinical negligence cases, with a particular emphasis on those claims in the…

CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE:  THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)

CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)

October 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Wambura & Ors v Barrick TZ Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB) Master Stevens rejected the claimants’ application to call an expert.  The judge contains a detailed consideration of the law and authorities relating to the court’s discretion…

WEBINAR ON DRAFTING SCHEDULES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: 9th NOVEMBER 2023

WEBINAR ON DRAFTING SCHEDULES IN PERSONAL INJURY CASES: 9th NOVEMBER 2023

October 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

I am presenting a webinar on drafting Schedules on the 9th November 2023.  Booking details are available here. “In the event, the Original Schedules of Loss were shown to be quite unreliable and, in many respects, bore little or no relation…

PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE

PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE

October 3, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One of the issues decided by Mr Justice Mellor in Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2023] EWHC 2408 (Ch) related to the attempts by a party (COPA) to adduce expert evidence from other trials by way of hearsay evidence…

DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH AND FOR LOSSES PRIOR TO DEATH: WEBINAR 11th OCTOBER 2023

DAMAGES IN ANTICIPATION OF DEATH AND FOR LOSSES PRIOR TO DEATH: WEBINAR 11th OCTOBER 2023

October 2, 2023 · by gexall · in Damages, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Webinar

Claims for reduction of life expectancy or for losses prior to death can be difficult and complex. They require a highly sensitive approach. They also require a large degree of knowledge of the relevant legal principles. There are traps and…

CLAIMANT HAD NOT BREACHED THEIR DUTY OF DISCLOSURE: A PARTY DOES NOT HAVE "CONTROL" OF THEIR PARTNER'S FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS

CLAIMANT HAD NOT BREACHED THEIR DUTY OF DISCLOSURE: A PARTY DOES NOT HAVE “CONTROL” OF THEIR PARTNER’S FINANCIAL DOCUMENTS

September 28, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Disclosure, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Morgan-Rowe v Woodgate [2023] EWHC 2375 (KB) makes some important points about the duty of disclosure.  A party giving disclosure doesn’t have to disclose details of their spouses’/partners accounts. “A married couple…

AN EXPERT SHOULD HAVE EXPERTISE IN THE ISSUE THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE ON: THEY CAN'T SIMPLY TEACH THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CASE

AN EXPERT SHOULD HAVE EXPERTISE IN THE ISSUE THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE ON: THEY CAN’T SIMPLY TEACH THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CASE

September 27, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some important observations on expert evidence in the judgment of Mrs Justice Bacon in Sycurio Ltd v PCI-Pal PLC & Anor [2023] EWHC 2161 (Pat). An expert must give evidence within the scope of their expertise.  To assert…

PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM "MUST" TO "MORE THAN PROBABLE" REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE

PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM “MUST” TO “MORE THAN PROBABLE” REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE

September 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Nash v Volskwagen Financial Services (UK) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2326 (KB) contains  important observations in relation to the law and evidence relating to causation.  However I want to look at the judge’s consideration…

COST BITES 98: THE SIMILARITIES IN MEDICAL REPORTS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE COSTS OF REPORTS

COST BITES 98: THE SIMILARITIES IN MEDICAL REPORTS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE COSTS OF REPORTS

August 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are returning again to HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) Costs Judge James considered the sums that should be allowed in relation to the claimants’ medical reports.  This involved a close examination of the reports…

PROVING THINGS 231: "WITNESS STATEMENTS" THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT

PROVING THINGS 231: “WITNESS STATEMENTS” THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT

August 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Cheshire Estate and legal Limited -v- Blanchfield & Others*  HHJ Bever, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, considered witness statements  served by the claimant that failed to comply with the Practice Direction. One was expert evidence posing…

EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: THE DUTY TO INFORM EXPERTS OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO INFORM THE COURT AND PARTIES OF A CHANGE OF VIEWS

July 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB)  (A copy of the judgment, on Old Square Chambers website, is available here.)  Again we are looking at the judge’s comments…

EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: "A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE... WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED"

EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: “A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE… WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED”

July 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter sent out another warning about the inadequate state of expert reports.  Here we look at the judgment in relation to the care experts. (A copy of…

A THUMBS UP EMOJI LED TO A BINDING CONTRACT: LESSONS FROM CANADA

July 6, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content

In South West Terminal Ltd. v Achter Land, 2023 SKKB 116 (CanLII) Keene J. decided that a thumbs up emoji “👍” led to a binding contract being created.   The case is mentioned in Legal Cheek here and has led to…

PROVING THINGS 230: WATCH THE METADATA: IF THERE ARE DIFFERENT DATES THEN THIS REQUIRES AN EXPLANATION

PROVING THINGS 230: WATCH THE METADATA: IF THERE ARE DIFFERENT DATES THEN THIS REQUIRES AN EXPLANATION

July 3, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content

In Adams & Ors v FS Capital Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 1649 (Ch) Mr Justice Edwin Johnson commented on the difficulties caused by the defendants’ failure to establish why the metadata for documents was different to the dates shown…

PROVING THINGS 229: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE CERTAIN HEADS OF DAMAGES: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

PROVING THINGS 229: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE CERTAIN HEADS OF DAMAGES: DECISION UPHELD ON APPEAL

June 30, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Lal v Reeder [2023] EWHC 1437 (KB) is a classic example of a failure to prove things.  The trial judge found that the claimant had failed to establish certain heads of damage. That…

PROVING THINGS 228: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS "IN ALMOST IDENTICAL FORMAT" FAIL TO BRING HOME THE DOUGH

PROVING THINGS 228: INADEQUATE DISCLOSURE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS “IN ALMOST IDENTICAL FORMAT” FAIL TO BRING HOME THE DOUGH

June 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Lionel Persey KC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) in Finsbury Food Group Plc v Axis Corporate Capital UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 1559 (Comm) shows some significant issues in relation to the evidence presented in…

BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL:  THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND

BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL: THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND

June 8, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have looked at the decision in relation to costs in the case of ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Anor [2023] EWHC 986 (KB) in an earlier post.  The decision on costs, and the primary judgment on…

PROVING THINGS 227: IF YOU ARE GOING TO ALLEGE THAT LAWYERS WERE NEGLIGENT IN NOT CALLING EVIDENCE THEN YOU REALLY SHOULD REALLY HAVE THAT EVIDENCE TO HAND

PROVING THINGS 227: IF YOU ARE GOING TO ALLEGE THAT LAWYERS WERE NEGLIGENT IN NOT CALLING EVIDENCE THEN YOU REALLY SHOULD REALLY HAVE THAT EVIDENCE TO HAND

June 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Striking out, Summary judgment

The decision in Murithi & Ors v AVH Legal LLP (t/a Tandem Law) & Ors [2023] EWHC 1245 (KB)  has in some ways a profound irony. A case alleging negligence by lawyers for failing to call evidence itself failed  because…

WHEN AN EXPERT DECLAIMS A POINT "WITH A LEVEL OF SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY": BUT THE HANDWRITING SAMPLE WAS NOT FROM THE CLAIMANT

WHEN AN EXPERT DECLAIMS A POINT “WITH A LEVEL OF SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY”: BUT THE HANDWRITING SAMPLE WAS NOT FROM THE CLAIMANT

May 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are plenty of examples of difficulties with expert’s giving evidence on this blog.  Another example  of problematic expert report can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in  Packham v Wightman & Ors [2023] EWHC 1256 (KB)….

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

May 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

A new edition of the King’s Bench Division Guide was published last week (although it is dated March 2023).  I will take a short look at the major changes. Firstly looking at a new passage in relation to the instruction…

PROVING THINGS 254: WHY YOU CAN NEVER BE CERTAIN ON BEING ABLE TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION: DEFENDANT'S CONDUCT QUESTIONABLE BUT STILL CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LOSS

PROVING THINGS 254: WHY YOU CAN NEVER BE CERTAIN ON BEING ABLE TO ESTABLISH CAUSATION: DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT QUESTIONABLE BUT STILL CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LOSS

May 17, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

There are plenty of examples in this series of claimants establishing breach of duty but failing on causation, particularly in the clinical negligence context. the judgment of Clare Padley (sitting as a High Court Judge) in  J & J Franks…

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 5th JUNE 2023

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 5th JUNE 2023

May 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Liability, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Contributory negligence is one of those issues that play a daily part of the life of the personal injury practitioner.  The basic principles  underlying findings of contributory negligence are rarely explored, however these can have profound practical implications for the…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND PART 36: A USEFUL NOTE OF JUDGMENT

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE AND PART 36: A USEFUL NOTE OF JUDGMENT

May 3, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Part 36

I am grateful to solicitor Bethan Parry from Browne Jacobson for sending me a note of the decision of HHJ Khan in Rix -v- Wall, the details of which are set out below.  The note is interesting in that it…

BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE

BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE

April 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Rowbottom v The Estate of Peter Howard, Deceased & Anor [2023] EWHC 931 (KB) HHL Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) was critical of the role of one of the experts in the case. “A second reason…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: SOCIAL MEDIA, SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE AND A LONG WALK

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: SOCIAL MEDIA, SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE AND A LONG WALK

April 13, 2023 · by gexall · in Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Legal Executive Vanessa Brooks for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Harrison in Thomas -v- Owen (21st March 2023, Cardiff County Court).  It is another example of social media playing a part in…

PARTS OF THE EXPERT'S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT

PARTS OF THE EXPERT’S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT

April 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC 186 Recorder Reed set out the importance of an expert knowing, and complying with, the rules relating to the presentation of expert evidence.  The judgment also emphasises the importance of the lawyers…

COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS

COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS

April 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The principles relating to the court granting permission to a party to change expert were considered in detail by Mrs Justice O’Farrell in  Avantage (Cheshire) Ltd & Ors v GB Building Solutions Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 802 (TCC).  The…

INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT... IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

INSURER FAILED IN PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE APPLICATION: BUT… IF THE RIGHT PARTY HAD BROUGHT THE APPLICATION IT WOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED

April 5, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Baker in Holt v Allianz Insurance Plc [2023] EWHC 790 (KB) is another round in a long running battle between car hire companies and insurers.  Whilst the insurer may have lost this round it is…

HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT'S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED

HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED

April 4, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Issues relating to handwriting experts comprise a surprisingly large percentage of the search terms that lead to this blog.  The question of the quality of such experts was considered by Master Clark in Watts v Watts [2023] EWHC 679 (Ch)….

← Previous 1 … 4 5 6 … 12 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • A REMINDER – DOCUMENTS IN AN AGREED BUNDLE ARE ADMISSIBLE AT THE HEARING AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR CONTENTS.
  • MAZUR MATTERS 60: THE REVISED LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE NOTE: SOME KEY POINTS: THIS WILL REQUIRE CLOSER OVERSIGHT OF THE WORK BEING DONE
  • AN “EXTERNAL” REPORT IS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUES IN THE CASE BUT THE JUDGE WILL DETERMINE ALL KEY MATTERS THEMSELVES..
  • THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE AS THE DEFENDANT ASSERTED: THE SCCO REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE
  • MAZUR MATTERS 59: REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THIS AROSE BECAUSE SOMEONE DIDN’T KNOW (OR APPLY) THE CORRECT RULES AS TO FIXED COSTS

Top Posts

  • MAZUR MATTERS 59: REMEMBER THAT MOST OF THIS AROSE BECAUSE SOMEONE DIDN'T KNOW (OR APPLY) THE CORRECT RULES AS TO FIXED COSTS
  • MAZUR MATTERS 60: THE REVISED LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE NOTE: SOME KEY POINTS: THIS WILL REQUIRE CLOSER OVERSIGHT OF THE WORK BEING DONE
  • THERE WAS NO AGREEMENT TO EXTEND TIME FOR SERVICE AS THE DEFENDANT ASSERTED: THE SCCO REFUSES TO SET ASIDE A DEFAULT COSTS CERTIFICATE
  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: TIME LIMITS FOR CHALLENGING SOLICITORS' BILLS
  • A REMINDER - DOCUMENTS IN AN AGREED BUNDLE ARE ADMISSIBLE AT THE HEARING AS EVIDENCE OF THEIR CONTENTS.

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.