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
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…

AN EXPERT WHO SHOULD LEARN THE RULES BEFORE REPORTING AGAIN: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

AN EXPERT WHO SHOULD LEARN THE RULES BEFORE REPORTING AGAIN: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

July 2, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are taking a short break from the detailed examination of issues relating to service of the claim form to look at another common issue on this blog – an expert that failed to comply with the rules.  I am…

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…

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…

EXPERT EVIDENCE, ADJOURNMENTS, CAPACITY AND APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT FOR CONTEMPT: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION AT FIRST INSTANCE

May 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v Khan & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 53 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of expert evidence in relation to capacity, in the context of applications for contempt of court.  It was held that…

CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND HINTS

CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND HINTS

May 15, 2024 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are hundreds of posts on this blog about the role of experts in civil litigation. In many of those cases the experts have been cross-examined and this has not ended well – for them.   I have already planned a…

CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN YOU TELL A WHOPPER THE FIRST TIME AROUND - IT COMES BACK TO BITE YOU IN A SECOND TRIAL

CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN YOU TELL A WHOPPER THE FIRST TIME AROUND – IT COMES BACK TO BITE YOU IN A SECOND TRIAL

May 14, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In McDonald’s Restaurants Ltd v Shirayama Shokusan Company Ltd [2024] EWHC 1133 (Ch) Mr Justice Edwin Johnson found that a company had misrepresented its intention at a trial which involved, essentially, the claimant’s right to a new tenancy of business…

IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT'S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT - BUT UNDECIDED

IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT – BUT UNDECIDED

May 7, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Frasers Group plc v Saxo Bank AS & Anor [2024] EWHC 188 (Comm) HHJ Pelling KC considered issues relating to whether a party’s correspondence with their expert leading up to the joint meeting of experts should be disclosed.  The…

AVOIDING MISTAKES WHEN DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: WEBINAR 9th MAY 2024

AVOIDING MISTAKES WHEN DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: WEBINAR 9th MAY 2024

April 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

Judges regularly complain that witness statements are inadequate and do not contain sufficient information,  alternatively that they contain much information that is irrelevant and the witness is unable to give.  This webinar looks at how practitioners can avoid basic errors…

A COURT CANNOT SIMPLY IGNORE AN UNCHALLENGED EXPERT REPORT: DOG SAVED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

A COURT CANNOT SIMPLY IGNORE AN UNCHALLENGED EXPERT REPORT: DOG SAVED BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

April 19, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The significance of unchallenged expert evidence at court was considered by the Administrative Court in  Fitzgerald v CPS [2024] EWHC 869 (Admin). Although this is a criminal case it considers the authorities in civil actions and the central point that…

PROCEDURE, DAMAGES, LIABILITY, COSTS AND LIMITATION: A SERIES OF WEBINARS THIS YEAR AIMING TO HELP AVOID OR DEAL WITH PROBLEMS IN LITIGATION

PROCEDURE, DAMAGES, LIABILITY, COSTS AND LIMITATION: A SERIES OF WEBINARS THIS YEAR AIMING TO HELP AVOID OR DEAL WITH PROBLEMS IN LITIGATION

April 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conditional Fee Agreements, Costs, Members Content, Sanctions, Service of the claim form, Striking out, Webinar, Witness statements

The issues arising from many of the cases looked at on this blog are being considered in a series of webinars starting later this month.  The webinars cover  many of the problem areas of litigation:  what to do when things…

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: "SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE" CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: “SUBSTANTIAL INJUSTICE” CONSIDERED IN DETAIL: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

April 10, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

In the judgment given today in Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB)  Mr Justice Ritchie dismissed the claimant’s claim as being fundamentally dishonest.  The judgment contains a detailed consideration of the issues relating to the…

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…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 14 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

  • EXPERT WATCH 79: WHEN A LITIGANT INSTRUCTS AN EXPERT AND THEN SEEKS PERMISSION TO RELY ON THEM: MIXED RESULTS
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHERE ARE WE NOW ON “MISSING” WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE ? TEN KEY POINTS WITH USEFUL LINKS
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 101: PUTTING A FIGURE IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM DOES NOT NECESSARILY ENTITLE A CLAIMANT TO DEFAULT JUDGMENT FOR THAT SUM
  • EXPERT WATCH 78 : “ROWING BACK”?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: “THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT”
  • SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON’T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU…)

Top Posts

A SUCCESSFUL JUDICIAL REVIEW OF A DECISION TO REFUSE PERMISSION TO APPEAL: GRANTING JUDGMENT AFTER AN EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION: A "WHOLLY EXCEPTIONAL COLLAPSE OF FAIR PROCEDURE"
SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU...)
COST BITES 465 : WITHOUT PREJUDICE COSTS BREAKDOWNS REMAINED PRIVILEGED: A LOWER BILL DID NOT ESTABLISH “UNAMBIGUOUS IMPROPRIETY”
EXPERT WATCH 78 : "ROWING BACK"?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: "THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT"
CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS, CHANGE OF SOLICITORS AND RATIFICATION AND INFORMED ADVICE: IT IS NOT SO EASY TO SIMPLY RECOMMEND A CHANGE OF SOLICITORS...

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.