Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Gestmin
WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A SUMMARY OF THE APPROACH IN GESTMIN

WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A SUMMARY OF THE APPROACH IN GESTMIN

August 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

A post last week dealt with issues relating to the judicial assessment of credibility. Here we look at one aspect of that in more detail. That is the decision in  Gestmin SGPS SA v Credit Suisse (UK) Ltd & Anor…

"VARIOUS WITNESSES CAN ALL GIVE HONEST BUT NEVERTHELESS CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF A GIVEN EVENT": GESTMIN PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENT

“VARIOUS WITNESSES CAN ALL GIVE HONEST BUT NEVERTHELESS CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF A GIVEN EVENT”: GESTMIN PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENT

April 6, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In  Barrow & Ors v Merret & Anor [2021] EWHC 792 (QB) Richard Hermer QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the guidance given in Gestmin in the context of a road traffic accident. It is a reminder…

PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: "THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE... IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK"

PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: “THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE… IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK”

February 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Lynch v Cadwallader & Anor [2021] EWHC 328 (Ch) Chief Insolvency Court Judge Briggs considered the Gestmin principles in a case where a bank failed to establish that a client had signed a guarantee. It is a good example…

THE GESTMIN PRINCIPLES IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: JUDGE DOUBTS WHETHER THEY CAN BE DIRECTLY APPLIED IN OTHER CONTEXTS

THE GESTMIN PRINCIPLES IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: JUDGE DOUBTS WHETHER THEY CAN BE DIRECTLY APPLIED IN OTHER CONTEXTS

July 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at the judicial assessment of evidence, particularly witness evidence.  Often this is done by reference to the “Gestmin” criteria. In CXB -v-North West Anglia NHS Foundation Trust, [2019] EWHC 2053 (QB) HH Judge Gore…

THE KIMATHI DECISION 4: THE APPROACH TO WITNESS EVIDENCE: MEMORIES ARE FLUID AND MALLEABLE: SOME KEY POINTS ON GESTMIN

THE KIMATHI DECISION 4: THE APPROACH TO WITNESS EVIDENCE: MEMORIES ARE FLUID AND MALLEABLE: SOME KEY POINTS ON GESTMIN

August 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the fourth in the series that looks at the decision in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 2066 (QB).  The trial judge was looking at evidence of matters that had happened some 50 years earlier,…

THE "TRUE VOICE OF THE WITNESSES ARE NOTABLY LACKING FROM THEIR WITNESS STATEMENTS": INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME & COSTS SPENT FOR NO GOOD REASON

THE “TRUE VOICE OF THE WITNESSES ARE NOTABLY LACKING FROM THEIR WITNESS STATEMENTS”: INORDINATE AMOUNT OF TIME & COSTS SPENT FOR NO GOOD REASON

July 6, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Estera Trust (Jersey) Ltd & Anor v Singh & Ors [2018] EWHC 1715 (Ch) Mr Justice Fancourt made some telling observations about the usefulness of witness statements prepared for the case.  This is a common observation in relation to witness…

BELIEVING YOUR CLIENTS: CAN THEY AFFORD IT? THE COMPLEX ISSUE OF "TRUTH" AND "LIES": WHAT DOES THE LAWYER DO?

BELIEVING YOUR CLIENTS: CAN THEY AFFORD IT? THE COMPLEX ISSUE OF “TRUTH” AND “LIES”: WHAT DOES THE LAWYER DO?

May 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Applications, Book Review, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are two sources for this post. The first is a blog by Lucy Reed on Pink Tape “It’s not my job to believe you – here’s why” ; the second is the judgment in  Ruffell -v- Lovatt HHJ Hughes 4 April 2018. …

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 2: ACADEMIC SCRUTINY: PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND WITNESS EVIDENCE

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 2: ACADEMIC SCRUTINY: PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND WITNESS EVIDENCE

March 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Near the beginning of many judgments after a trial there is a section where the judge gives their view of the reliability and credibility of the witnesses. In about 98% of cases it is not necessary to read further to…

WITNESS STATEMENTS DIRECT: MEMORY, GESTMIN £15 MILLION AND QUITE A LOT OF ALCOHOL: A HEADY BREW

WITNESS STATEMENTS DIRECT: MEMORY, GESTMIN £15 MILLION AND QUITE A LOT OF ALCOHOL: A HEADY BREW

July 27, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a certain appropriateness in one of the last major first-instance judgments of Mr Justice Leggatt being about witness credibility and the Gestmin criteria. In Blue -v- Ashley [2017] EWHC 1928 (Comm) Gestmin figured heavily. Everyone believed they were…

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

  • COST BITES 391: TOO MUCH CORRESPONDENCE, GRADE C RATES NOT INCREASED AND “SO CALLED” ARGUMENTS, WHICH REPEAT THE CONTENTS OF OVER-LENGTHY WITNESS STATEMENTS
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: BUNDLES, WITNESSES AND PREPARING FOR TRIAL: WEBINAR ON 29th MAY 2026: IT MAY BE A WHOLE BUNDLE OF FUN
  • COST BITES 391: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION THAT SOLICITOR’S BILL SHOULD BE ASSESSED AT “NIL”: THERE IS NO “RESTITUTIONARY” RIGHT TO DAMAGES WHERE THE CFA ITSELF MADE EXPRESS PROVISIONS FOR THESE CIRCUMSTANCES
  • THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE – LANDING SOLICITORS IN SERIOUS TROUBLE AGAIN (AND DON’T BLAME THE AI FOR EVERYTHING – IT ACTUALLY GAVE OUT WARNINGS TO CHECK…)
  • BACK TO BASICS (BANK HOLIDAY) MONDAY: A REMINDER OF WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: THE PROFOUND DIFFERENCE IN THE WAY THE COURT APPROACHES A PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION FOR AN EXTENSION

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.