PROVING THINGS 203: EVIDENCE AND SCOTT SCHEDULES IN COERCIVE CONTROL CASES: SCOTT SCHEDULES “INEFFECTIVE AND FREQUENTLY UNSUITABLE”
In F v M [2021] EWFC 4 Mr Justice Hayden considered issues relating to fact finding in a case of “coercive control”. Although the difficulties here are in the context of a family case, the issues will have some relevance…
PROVING THINGS 201: THE WHITE LION HOTEL CASE AND PROVING BREACH OF DUTY BY AN OCCUPIER
In the judgment in The White Lion Hotel (A Partnership) v James [2021] EWCA Civ 31 the Court of Appeal set out some importance principles in relation to claims based on the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. The court upheld a…
PROVING THINGS 200: ALL THE SERIES IN ONE PLACE: THE (VERY) EXPENSIVE COSTS OF FAILING TO THINK FULLY ABOUT EVIDENCE
There are now 200 posts in the “Proving Things” Series. These centre, usually, on a failure to establish matters at trial. Sometimes the failures are dramatic. In Marathon Asset Management LLP -v- Seddon [2017] EWHC 300 (Comm) i the claimants had…
PROVING THINGS 199: “THE BITTER TRUTH”: INNOCENT PARTIES MAY SUFFER NO LOSSES – AND RECEIVE NO DAMAGES
The judgment of Mr Stephen Houseman QC sitting as a Deputy High Court judge in YJB Port Ltd v M&A Pharmachem Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 42 (Ch) is another example of a party failing to prove it had suffered…
PROVING THINGS 196: PROVING THAT FILES WERE (OR WERE NOT) DELIVERED IS MORE TRICKY THAN YOU MIGHT THINK
The judgment of Master Clark in The Law Society of England and Wales (Solicitors Regulation Authority) v Sophie Khan & Co Ltd [2021] EWHC 2 (ChD) highlights the difficulties involved in proving, or disproving, that a document was delivered. In…
PROVING THINGS 193: THE POSSIBILITY OF THE DECEASED PERSON HAVING INCREASED EARNINGS AND “LOSS OF CHANCE” CONSIDERED IN A FATAL CASE
In many ways the judgment Young v Downey [2020] EWHC 3457 (QB) is an extraordinary case, involving a terrorist killing taking place in 1982. On the other hand it shows a principle of general application in the assessment of fatal…
PROVING THINGS 192: WHEN A WITNESS GIVES EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT TOOK PLACE 50 YEARS AGO: HOW THE JUDGE WEIGHS THE EVIDENCE
In Pinnegar v Kellogg International Corporation & Anor [2020] EWHC 3431 (QB) HHJ Platts (sitting as a High Court judge) considered the weight to be given to evidence of matters that had happened some 50 years previously. It shows that…
PROVING THINGS 191: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (III): CLAIMING AND PROVING “FRINGE BENEFITS”.
Some jobs have “fringe benefits” which provide an important part of the employee’s overall remuneration. There are many examples of these benefits being claimed as damages. Here we look at some cases where the courts have considered the issue of…
PROVING THINGS 191: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (II): A CLIENT QUESTIONNAIRE
Here we return to the basic issue of proving loss of income. This often applies in personal injury action, but is an issue that can arise in several other types of litigation. We have a questionnaire on the single issue…
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…
PROVING THINGS 189: IF YOU WANT TO PROVE THE DEPTH OF SOMETHING – TAKE A RULER (OH, AND PHOTOGRAPHS)
In Nash v Hertfordshire County Council [2020] EWHC 3247 (QB) HHJ Lickley QC, sitting as judge of the High Court, dismissed the claimant’s claim for damages. There were numerous witnesses and expert involved. “They took photographs when they were at…
PROVING THINGS 188: PROVING A WARNING WOULD HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE: PEDESTRIAN HIT BY CRICKET BALL LOSES CASE ON APPEAL
In Lewis v Wandsworth London Borough Council [2020] EWHC 3205 (QB) Mr Justice Stewart overturned a decision in favour of claimant who had been struck by a cricket ball whilst walking near a cricket pitch. “… the defendant was…
PROVING THINGS 187: THE CAMERA MAY LIE: THE IMPORTANCE OF DATES ON PHOTOGRAPHS
Today we are journeying into the Family Court to look at the judgment of Mrs Justice Judd in K v G [2020] EWHC 3209 (Fam). It shows the importance of obtaining metadata in relation to documents. In this case the…
PROVING THINGS 186: WHEN THE ONE WITNESS IN THE CASE HAD LITTLE KNOWLEDGE OF HOW THE FIGURES IN THE SCHEDULE HAD BEEN REACHED – THERE IS TROUBLE AHEAD…
In Crazy Bear Group Ltd v Patel & Anor [2020] EWHC 3023 (Ch) Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Jones (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered whether defendants in an action had proven that they had suffered damages…
PROVING THINGS 185: SAYING “I’M BROKE” DOES NOT PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: “THE DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO KNOW THE CASE THEY HAVE TO MEET”
We are returning again to the Court of Appeal decision in Diriye v Bojaj & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 1400. This time concentrating upon the Court’s comments in relation to the need to prove impecuniosity and the claimant’s failure to…
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…
PROVING THINGS 180: ACCEPTING A LIFT WITH A DRUNKEN DRIVER, WHILST DRUNK: DEFENDANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH THAT FAILING TO WEAR A SEAT BELT MADE A DIFFERENCE
The judgment today of HHJ Robinson (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Campbell v Advantage Insurance Company Ltd [2020] EWHC 2210 (QB) makes interesting reading. 1. A claimant cannot properly argue that he was too drunk himself…
PROVING THINGS 179: SECRETARY OF STATE’S “SUPERFICIAL INVESTIGATION” FAILS TO PROVE THAT DEFENDANT WAS A DE FACTO DIRECTOR
In the judgment given today in Secretary of State for Business, Energy And Industrial Strategy v Rahman [2020] EWHC 2213 (Ch) HHJ Paul Matthews found that the Secretary of State had failed to prove that the defendant had ever been…
PROVING THINGS 178: PROVING PREJUDICE: THE NEED FOR SPECIFIC EVIDENCE
There is another aspect of the Court of Appeal decision in Cable v Liverpool Victoria Insurance Co Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 1015 that justifies closer examination. That is the court’s observations on the judge’s finding of prejudice. The Court of Appeal…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 78: NO DUTY ON AN INJURED CLAIMANT TO USE THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE
This post is due to a tweet someone copied me in on this morning. The issue was, ostensibly, one of general damages in a personal injury case. An insurer was refusing to pay the costs of private treatment – stating…
