COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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…
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
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
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
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”
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
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
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”
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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’…
WITNESS STATEMENTS “NOT IN MY STOCK IN TRADE”: HIGH COURT JUDGE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ARGUMENTATIVE AND LARGELY IRRELEVANT WITNESS STATEMENTS
Last week I wrote about the report on witness evidence working group of the business and property courts. That report commented that drafting witness statements (more accurately evidence in chief) was no longer part of a lawyer’s “stock in trade”. …
WITNESS STATEMENTS: EDITED HIGHLIGHTS OF THE REPORT OF THE WITNESS EVIDENCE WORKING GROUP: THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS
This report of the Witness Evidence Working Group was produced at the end of last year. It highlights some major issues in relation to the use of witness statements, and the role and experience of those preparing them. It has…
INACCURATE TRANSCRIPTS WERE NOT AUTHENTIC: HIGH COURT DECISION
One reliable element in most litigation is a transcript of a judgment. In Ghassemian v de Beaumont & Anor [2020] EWHC 1642 (Ch) Mr Justice Birss had cause to question the accuracy of a transcript of his own judgment. “The…
COUNSEL’S ADVICE IS NOT EVIDENCE: REALLY, ITS NOT.
There is an interesting consideration of the role of counsel’s advice in the judgment of HHJ Vincent in AZ v BZ (financial remedies appeal) [2020] EWFC 28. In a financial remedies hearing, a judge was wrong to firstly admit, and…
THE EXPERT THAT DOESN’T GIVE HIS SOURCES (EXCEPT WIKIPEDIA): A PRACTICE DEPRECATED BY THE COURT.
In Engie Fabricom (UK) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1626 (TCC) Mrs Justice O’Farrell commented on the practice of one of the experts in the case. Failure to follow the basic guidance given in the…
PROVING THINGS 177: WHEN YOU ARE RELYING ON A MEDICAL EXPERT ON CAUSATION WHO “SHOOTS FROM THE HIP” (IT DOESN’T END WELL)
I have written many times about issues arising from expert witnesses. In clinical negligence cases the role of the expert witness is often paramount. The claimant, in particular, is almost wholly reliant on expert evidence in relation to causation. It…
THE SEVEN YEAR ITCH: CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEFS’ 7th (OR 29th?) BIRTHDAY: FACTS, FIGURES AND HOW IT ALL BEGAN
This week sees the seventh anniversary of Civil Litigation Brief as a blog. That, it appears, is relatively young as a blog, the housing law blog Nearly Legal recently celebrated its 14th anniversary and is well into its truculent teenage…
SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE, ALLEGATIONS OF MALINGERING AND INDEMNITY COSTS (AGAINST THE DEFENDANT)
I had no sooner finished a webinar about surveillance evidence this afternoon when I received an email and a copy of a case from solicitor Steve Evans.* The judgment of HHJ Yelton (sitting in the High Court) in Kilbey -v-…
COVID REPEATS 43: FAREPAK: “A DOCUMENT CREATED IN THE LANGUAGE OF LAWYERS BY THE LAWYERS”
Today we are revisiting the observations of Mr Justice Smith in the Farepak case farepak-judges-statement. It presents an object lesson in the need for careful preparation of witness evidence and identifying precisely what “evidence” a witness can give. “The…
COVID REPEATS 41: OFFICE GOSSIP IS NOT EVIDENCE
This week we continue with our look back at cases in relation to witness evidence. This contains another reminder that there is a requirement, a mandatory requirement, that a witness making a witness statement gives the source of their information…
![JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: "ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN"](https://i0.wp.com/www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/calculator_count_statistics_1277492.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: “ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN”
Last week the “Covid Repeats” posts on this blog highlighted a few (and just a few) of the cases where judges had been critical of the role of experts, or experts involved in cases has been problematic. That this remains…
NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER FOR EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION GOES UP IN SMOKE…
Possibly the most difficult position you could put yourself in in litigation is for the court to make an order, do something the court did not allow, not get permission in advance, and then seek relief from sanctions thereafter. …
EVALUATING EVIDENCE ON APPEAL: THE APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT READILY DISPLACE THE FINDINGS OF THE TRIAL JUDGE
I am grateful to Christopher Kardahji from Irwin Mitchell solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Lenord -v- First Manchester Limited [2020] EWHC 982 (QB). The judgment contains a detailed analysis of the…
WHEN A DEFENDANT FILED A COSTS BUDGET LATE: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: “THE DEFAULTING PARTY HAS ONLY ITSELF OR ITS LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE TO BLAME”
The judgment of HHJ Simon Barker QC in Heathfield International LLC v Axiom Stone (London) Ltd [2020] EWHC 1075 (Ch) is another example of a party coming to grief because of the failure to file a costs budget timeously. That…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: THE STANDARD OF PROOF FOR DISHONESTY: ALSO DELAY OF 22 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT UNACCEPTABLE
In Bank St Petersburg PJSC & Anor v Arkhangelsky & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 408 the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial because of doubts in relation to the trial judge’s findings of fact. The judge had applied too high…
EXPERT WITNESSES: HANDING THE JUDGE AN UNSORTED MEDLEY OF DOCUMENTS MAY NOT GO DOWN TOO WELL
There was one aspect of the evidence mentioned in the judgment Morrow v Shrewsbury Rugby Union Football Club Ltd [2020] EWHC 379 (QB) Mrs Justice Farbey that was somewhat unusual. An expert handed the judge a “file of documents” to…
“GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS”: FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AT TRIAL – AN EXAMPLE
Last month I reviewed the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813. In that case the judge allowed the defendant to adduce surveillance evidence, even though it was adduced late. I am grateful to Mark…
PROVING THINGS 171: A TALE OF TWO TELEVISION PRESENTERS (AND OF A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AT ALL ON VITAL ISSUES)
The judgment of the Employment Tribunal in the case of Ahmed -v- BBC (10th January 2019) has already received wide publicity. It is worthwhile looking at the paucity, often the total absence of evidence, on many key issues on the…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995
The judgment of Deputy Master Linwood in Barnaby & Anor v Johnson (aka Smith) [2019] EWHC 3344 (Ch) provides a reminder of the terms of Section 4 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and an example of its application. …
You must be logged in to post a comment.