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 6
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)….

PROVING THINGS 251: PROVING THAT YOU STOLE MY DRAGON IS NOT  AN EASY TASK: FIRE BREATHING MONSTERS ARE A VERY OLD CONCEPT INDEED

PROVING THINGS 251: PROVING THAT YOU STOLE MY DRAGON IS NOT AN EASY TASK: FIRE BREATHING MONSTERS ARE A VERY OLD CONCEPT INDEED

April 3, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content

In Evans v John Lewis Plc & Anor [2023] EWHC 766 (IPECP HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a High Court Judge) had to compare and contrast two fictional dragons.  The claimant failed to establish that the defendants’ dragon was so…

PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE

March 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Cannon v Bar Standards Board [2023] EWCA Civ 278 the Court of Appeal held that expert evidence placed before it failed to establish that an appellant lacked capacity.  The case provides importance guidance about the nature and quality of…

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE CAN HANDLE EXPERT WITNESSES AT EVERY POINT OF THE SPECTRUM

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE CAN HANDLE EXPERT WITNESSES AT EVERY POINT OF THE SPECTRUM

March 10, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Fawcett & Ors v TUI UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 400 (KB) Mr Dexter Dias KC (setting as a Deputy High Court Judge) refused the claimant’s application to exclude the defendant’s expert evidence.  The matters to which the claimant objected…

SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT'S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION

SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT’S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION

February 23, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Czernuszka v King [2023] EWHC 380 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the duty of care owed to those taking place in sporting activities.  It also shows the important role of…

JUDGMENT OF A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY  - BUT THIS CASE GOES MUCH FURTHER: COLLUSION IS FOUND

JUDGMENT OF A FINDING OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY – BUT THIS CASE GOES MUCH FURTHER: COLLUSION IS FOUND

February 23, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

Here we are looking at a case where District Judge Lumb made a clear finding of fundamental dishonesty on the part of a personal injury claimant.  That finding was confirmed, or perhaps compounded, by the judge’s views in relation to…

YOU'VE INSTRUCTED THE WRONG EXPERT: AND THIS HAS MAJOR CONSEQUENCES

YOU’VE INSTRUCTED THE WRONG EXPERT: AND THIS HAS MAJOR CONSEQUENCES

February 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in GKE v Gunning [2023] EWHC 332 (KB). This time to look at the judge’s observations on the claimant’s expert on liability.   The judge observed that the claimant had instructed the…

COST BITES 49: ARE THE COSTS OF A MEDICAL AGENCY RECOVERABLE IN THE FIXED COSTS REGIME? DISTRICT JUDGE FINDS THAT THEY ARE

January 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Experts, Fixed Costs, Members Content

Are the costs of a medical agency recoverable under the fixed costs regime? I am grateful to barrister John Meehan for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Phillips in Wilkinson-Mulvaney -v- UK Insurance Ltd (19th January…

"HYPERBOLIC COMMENT" NOT WELCOME IN LITIGATION: HIGH COURT JUDGE SENDS OUT A WARNING: PLANE LANGUAGE IS BEST...

“HYPERBOLIC COMMENT” NOT WELCOME IN LITIGATION: HIGH COURT JUDGE SENDS OUT A WARNING: PLANE LANGUAGE IS BEST…

January 19, 2023 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

In Peregrine Aviation Bravo Ltd & Ors v Laudamotion GmbH & Anor [2023] EWHC 48 (Comm) Mr Justice Henshaw was critical of “hyperbolic comment” in relation to the witness evidence.  This is not the first time that a judge has…

EVERYONE ELSE IN THE TRAIN CARRIAGE CAN HEAR YOU KNOW: THE DANGERS OF WORKING (AND TALKING) ON THE TRAIN

EVERYONE ELSE IN THE TRAIN CARRIAGE CAN HEAR YOU KNOW: THE DANGERS OF WORKING (AND TALKING) ON THE TRAIN

January 19, 2023 · by gexall · in Conduct, Members Content

Twice in the past two days lawyers have tweeted experiences of people sitting in a train carriage and openly discussing ongoing cases. “What offers are we going to make”, on both occasions.  One tweeter observed that he knew the subject…

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM

COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: DEFENDANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED PERMISSION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF DISCONTINUANCE: DEFENDANT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO STRIKE OUT THE CLAIM

January 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil Procedure, Members Content, QOCS

In  Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 the Court of Appeal rejected the defendant’s appeal, which was an attempt to subvert the principles of Qualified One Way Costs Shifting (“QOCS”).  The claimant discontinued the action…

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST EXPERT WITNESS SET ASIDE ON APPEAL: THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT'S CONCLUSIONS CAN BE CRITICISED DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF THEIR DUTY

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST EXPERT WITNESS SET ASIDE ON APPEAL: THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT’S CONCLUSIONS CAN BE CRITICISED DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF THEIR DUTY

January 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Nadia Whittaker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Sweeting in Robinson -v- Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust and Mercier [2023] EWHC 21 (KB), a copy of the judgment is available here. …

APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS "FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS"

APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS “FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS”

July 19, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Coronavirus, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group v E (Covid Vaccination) (Rev1) [2022] EWCOP 15 Mr Justice Poole disallowed an application by a respondent in relation to expert evidence.  The expert had been instructed without compliance with the procedural rules in…

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER STRIKING OUT AN ACTION: A CASE WITH "A NUMBER OF EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES", NOT LEAST THAT THE DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE WAS UNRELIABLE

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER STRIKING OUT AN ACTION: A CASE WITH “A NUMBER OF EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES”, NOT LEAST THAT THE DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE WAS UNRELIABLE

May 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In  Storey v British Telecommunications Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 616 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order striking out an personal injury action.  The court was fairly critical about the evidence that had been placed before it…

WHEN AN EMAIL FROM A SOLICITOR IS EVIDENCE OF LOSS: EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE 3 STAGE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL

WHEN AN EMAIL FROM A SOLICITOR IS EVIDENCE OF LOSS: EVIDENCE AT THE STAGE 3 STAGE CONSIDERED ON APPEAL

October 5, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Sarah Robson for bringing my attention to the decision of HHJ Jarman QC in Akram v Aviva Insurance Ltd [2021] EW Misc 16 (CC).  This is a case that highlights the flexibility the courts have…

THE USE OF EXPERT WITNESSES TO CONSTRUE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVES AFTER BREXIT:  HOW THE COURT WORKS WITH "ONE OR BOTH HANDS TIED BEHIND ITS BACK"

THE USE OF EXPERT WITNESSES TO CONSTRUE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVES AFTER BREXIT: HOW THE COURT WORKS WITH “ONE OR BOTH HANDS TIED BEHIND ITS BACK”

June 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Brexit, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Greenaway v Parrish & Ors [2021] EWHC 1506 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the “nightmare position” the courts are now in as a result of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 in relation to interpreting European Directives.   This…

JOURNALIST ALLOWED TO VIEW DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN COURT JUDGMENT SIX YEARS AGO: CPR 5.4C CONSIDERED

JOURNALIST ALLOWED TO VIEW DOCUMENTS REFERRED TO IN COURT JUDGMENT SIX YEARS AGO: CPR 5.4C CONSIDERED

May 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

In Goodley v The Hut Group Ltd [2021] EWHC 1193 (Comm) Mr Justice Calver allowed a journalist’s application for sight of documents referred to in open court. The judgment contains some important observations in relation to CPR 5.4C.   THE…

A SCHEME SETTING UP COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS IS NOT SUBJECT TO WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRIVILEGE

A SCHEME SETTING UP COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS IS NOT SUBJECT TO WITHOUT PREJUDICE PRIVILEGE

May 6, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Members Content

There are many procedural issues considered in the judgment of TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2021] EWHC 1179 (QB). Here I want to look at one – whether the trial judge should be informed of the…

SOLICITORS AND ATTENDANCE  NOTES: JUDGES NEARLY ALWAYS PREFER THE CONTEMPORANEOUS NOTES

SOLICITORS AND ATTENDANCE NOTES: JUDGES NEARLY ALWAYS PREFER THE CONTEMPORANEOUS NOTES

March 16, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of HHK Keyser QC (sitting as a High Court judge) in Mundil-Williams v Williams & Ors [2021] EWHC 586 (Ch) serves as a reminder of the importance of contemporary attendance notes as a source of evidence. “the best…

REVIEW OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN 2020 III : SOME FACTS AND FIGURES: POPULAR BLOG POSTS, VISITOR NUMBERS AND SEARCH TERMS

REVIEW OF CIVIL PROCEDURE IN 2020 III : SOME FACTS AND FIGURES: POPULAR BLOG POSTS, VISITOR NUMBERS AND SEARCH TERMS

December 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

Needless to say this has been an unusual year for litigators.   It is always interesting to review what have been the most popular posts on this blog and look at some facts and figures.  Can we tell anything about the…

EXPERTS NOT REALLY NECESSARY WHEN A JUDGE LOOKS AT BALLET SHOES: EVIDENCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE EN POINTE

EXPERTS NOT REALLY NECESSARY WHEN A JUDGE LOOKS AT BALLET SHOES: EVIDENCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE EN POINTE

December 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Instructing experts in circumstances where they are not necessary, or their evidence is not admissible, is a common theme in litigation.  This issue was considered by Mr David Stone (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Rothy’s Inc v…

A SERIES OF WEBINARS ON "STAYING SAFE" IN PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE: BRIGHTEN UP YOUR NEW YEAR

A SERIES OF WEBINARS ON “STAYING SAFE” IN PERSONAL INJURY PRACTICE: BRIGHTEN UP YOUR NEW YEAR

December 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Relief from sanctions, Risks of litigation, Schedules, Well being, Witness statements

To help 2021 run smoothly  for  litigators I am presenting a series of webinars in February and March on the theme of “staying safe” in the running of personal injury cases. The webinars look at key areas of practice and…

PROVING THINGS 190: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (1) : THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT: THE QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK

PROVING THINGS 190: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (1) : THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT: THE QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK

December 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Useful links, Witness statements

The basic task of proving damages, particularly elements such as loss of earnings and disability in the labour market, are often overlooked in witness statements prepared for trial, both in personal injury actions and other actions were loss of income…

JUDGE REFUSES TO RECONSIDER CRITICISMS OF EXPERT WITNESS IN A JUDGMENT: EXPERT DUTIES CANNOT BE DELEGATED

JUDGE REFUSES TO RECONSIDER CRITICISMS OF EXPERT WITNESS IN A JUDGMENT: EXPERT DUTIES CANNOT BE DELEGATED

December 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd & Anor v Generics UK Ltd (t\a MYLAN) [2020] EWHC 3270 (Pat) Mr Justice Marcus Smith made some observations about the role of the expert witness and the importance of their evidence being criticised in…

WHY AN EXPERT WITNESS MUST EXAMINE THE OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE: WHY MEDICAL RECORDS ARE NORMALLY THE KEY

November 27, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

There  are several short passages in the judgment of HHJ Baucher in Ali v The Home Office [2020] EW Misc 27 (CC) which emphasises the need for expert witnesses to consider the objective evidence before reporting.   It also shows the…

THE APPROACH OF THE COURT AT TRIAL WHEN A PARTY HAS NOT GIVEN DISCLOSURE: THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT IS AGAINST THEM

THE APPROACH OF THE COURT AT TRIAL WHEN A PARTY HAS NOT GIVEN DISCLOSURE: THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT IS AGAINST THEM

November 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Sanctions

In Aegean Baltic Bank SA v Renzlor Shipping Ltd [2020] EWHC 2851 (Comm) Mr Adrian Beltrami QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered the appropriate approach at trial when a party has been debarred from calling evidence….

PROVING THINGS 184: PROVING YOU CAN'T A CLAIM WILL BE "STIFLED"  REQUIRES A DETAILED EXPLANATION

PROVING THINGS 184: PROVING YOU CAN’T A CLAIM WILL BE “STIFLED” REQUIRES A DETAILED EXPLANATION

October 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment

In National Tourism Council of Qatar v Mehdiyev [2020] EWHC 2638 (Ch) Deputy Master Hansen considered the defendant’s evidence as to means when deciding whether or not to impose terms when setting aside a judgment.  It is important to note…

PROVING THINGS 182: FAILING TO PROVE A CONTRACT WAS SIGNED AND GETTING DAMAGES OF £1: NOT A GREAT RESULT FOR A CLAIMANT

PROVING THINGS 182: FAILING TO PROVE A CONTRACT WAS SIGNED AND GETTING DAMAGES OF £1: NOT A GREAT RESULT FOR A CLAIMANT

September 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content

The judgment of JJH Melissa Clarke, sitting as a High Court Judge, in DPA (London) Ltd v D’Aguanno & Ors [2020] EWHC 2374 (IPEC) is a classic example of failing to prove key matters in a claim. Firstly the claimant…

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP - JUNE 2020

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – JUNE 2020

July 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Useful links

A round up of posts and articles about costs, procedure and evidence from June 2020. (Matters relating to Coronavirus and civil procedure will be dealt with in a separate post). Costs Litigation Futures – QC’s £1.5m brief fee for nine months’…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 13 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • PROVING THINGS 292: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR COSTS: NO “HUMAN SOURCE” FOR THE MATERIAL PROVIDED: THE IMPORTANCE OF GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
  • THE KEY CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES 2026: WEBINAR ON THE 24th JUNE 2026
  • GETTING TO GRIPS WITH TIME ESTIMATES: THE KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL POINTERS AND CHECKLISTS: AVOIDING YOUR ESTIMATE BEING CALLED “ABSURD”
  • COST BITES 403: JUDGMENT TODAY: SUCCESS FEE AND ATE PREMIUM NOT PAYABLE BY CLIENT WHEN THE SOLICITOR FAILED TO MAKE REASONABLE ENQUIRIES ABOUT BTE INSURANCE
  • THE VEXED ISSUE OF TIME ESTIMATES (AND VOLUMINOUS BUNDLES) AGAIN: IF YOU ARE GOING TO “JUMP THE QUEUE” THEN THERE IS A DUTY ON BOTH PARTIES TO PRESENT A CASE THAT CAN BE HEARD IN THE TIME GIVEN

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.