Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Witness credibility » Page 2
WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: A STATEMENT THAT WAS "BASED ON A COMBINATION OF SPECULATION AND DOUBLE, TRIPLE OR EVEN MORE REMOTE HEARSAY"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: A STATEMENT THAT WAS “BASED ON A COMBINATION OF SPECULATION AND DOUBLE, TRIPLE OR EVEN MORE REMOTE HEARSAY”

March 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

We have looked at many cases in which judges have been critical of the way in which witness statements are drafted.  This case is one of the most clear and extreme examples. The defendant (a firm of solicitors) failed to…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A CLIENT BLAMES THEIR SOLICITOR FOR ISSUES IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT: SOME EXAMPLES CONSIDERED

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A CLIENT BLAMES THEIR SOLICITOR FOR ISSUES IN THE WITNESS STATEMENT: SOME EXAMPLES CONSIDERED

March 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Occasionally I give in-house presentations on drafting witness statements.  I always emphasise the importance of protecting the client from over-enthusiastic drafting by their lawyer to make sure that the witness statement is accurate and compliant.  I then ask what steps…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: WITNESS CREDIBILITY:  THE PRINCIPLES IN TUI -V- GRIFFITHS DID NOT IMPACT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF A LAY WITNESS

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY II: WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE PRINCIPLES IN TUI -V- GRIFFITHS DID NOT IMPACT ON THE ASSESSMENT OF A LAY WITNESS

March 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we have an unusual argument where an appellant attempted to use the decision in Tui -v- Griffiths to argue that a tribunal should not have accepted the evidence of a lay witness.  The evidence of the witness in question…

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2026

AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2026

February 27, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Webinar, Witness statements

We have seen a lot of issues over the years in relation to the drafting of witness statements and presentation of witness evidence.  There are many cases that illustrate the problems that arise. This webinar aims to head off those…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A WITNESS STATEMENT "MADE UP OF SUBMISSIONS OR COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS RATHER THAN EVIDENCE"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A WITNESS STATEMENT “MADE UP OF SUBMISSIONS OR COMMENTARY ON DOCUMENTS RATHER THAN EVIDENCE”

February 25, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There are numerous warnings and strictures about not putting submissions, commentary and opinion in witness statements.  More than one observer has commented that these rules are routinely ignored.   We have examples of this here.  We also have an example of…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EXPERT EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS (ALLOWED IN PART): ADVOCACY AND ARGUMENT - HAD TO GO

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: EXPERT EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS (ALLOWED IN PART): ADVOCACY AND ARGUMENT – HAD TO GO

February 18, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

We are looking at a  case where the sole issue the court was considering  was the question of whether passages in the witness statements provided by the claimant were admissible. Unusually the Competition Appeal Tribunal allowed parts of the statements…

PROVING THINGS 278: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE THEIR CASE WHILST THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO PROVE FRAUD: MULTIPLE INCONSISTENCIES LEAD TO EVIDENCE NOT BEING ACCEPTED

PROVING THINGS 278: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE THEIR CASE WHILST THE DEFENDANT FAILS TO PROVE FRAUD: MULTIPLE INCONSISTENCIES LEAD TO EVIDENCE NOT BEING ACCEPTED

February 12, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

Here we look at a judgment where the claimant failed to establish his case.   The defendant also failed to prove that the claimant was involved in a “staged crash”.  It shows how cumulative inconsistencies in a party’s evidence can lead…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE DRAFTING OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: "IT IS DIFFICULT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WHAT F SAYS AND WHAT AN ALGORITHM TELLS F TO SAY"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE DRAFTING OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: “IT IS DIFFICULT TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN WHAT F SAYS AND WHAT AN ALGORITHM TELLS F TO SAY”

February 11, 2026 · by gexall · in Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

There is much material about witness evidence and witness statements on this site.  In recent years we have also been discussing the use (and misuse) of artificial intelligence.  We can be fairly sure that there will be much more about…

DEFENDANTS GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE SERVED LATE: EVEN THOUGH THIS LED TO THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE TRIAL

DEFENDANTS GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE SERVED LATE: EVEN THOUGH THIS LED TO THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE TRIAL

February 10, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

A defendant that wishes to rely on surveillance evidence must choose its timing with extreme care.  If the evidence is disclosed too early then the claimant could be “tipped off”; too late and this could be categorised as an “ambush”. …

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY ii: WHY A JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EVIDENCE OF THE DEFENDANTS' WITNESS: SOME REPLIES WERE "ESSENTIALLY MEANINGLESS VERBIAGE DESIGNED TO FOB OFF QUESTIONS" HE "PREFERRED NOT TO ANSWER"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY ii: WHY A JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THE EVIDENCE OF THE DEFENDANTS’ WITNESS: SOME REPLIES WERE “ESSENTIALLY MEANINGLESS VERBIAGE DESIGNED TO FOB OFF QUESTIONS” HE “PREFERRED NOT TO ANSWER”

February 4, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

 Knowing the  factors that lead to the evidence of a witness not being accepted is an important part of the litigator’s “skill set”.  Here we look at a case where the evidence of a witness was roundly rejected.   “I…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW DOES THE COURT APPROACH EVIDENCE OF SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED OVER FOUR YEARS BEFORE AND TOOK PLACE WITHIN TWO MINUTES?

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW DOES THE COURT APPROACH EVIDENCE OF SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED OVER FOUR YEARS BEFORE AND TOOK PLACE WITHIN TWO MINUTES?

January 29, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This series enables us to look at witness evidence in many different contexts. Here we look at evidence relating to an arrest and events that took place within two minutes.  The judge was well aware of the issues that could…

EXPERT WATCH 32: A REVIEW OF THE CASE LAW AS TO THE INDEPENDENCE (OR OTHERWISE) OF EXPERT WITNESSES

EXPERT WATCH 32: A REVIEW OF THE CASE LAW AS TO THE INDEPENDENCE (OR OTHERWISE) OF EXPERT WITNESSES

January 29, 2026 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are looking again at a case looked at yesterday. This is because the judgment contained a useful summary of many leading cases relating to the question of expert bias, or apparent bias. “It is always desirable that an expert…

WHEN A WITNESS STATEMENT IS REALLY LEGAL ARGUMENT: THIS IS NOT APPROPRIATE (NOR IS IT A NEW PROBLEM...)

WHEN A WITNESS STATEMENT IS REALLY LEGAL ARGUMENT: THIS IS NOT APPROPRIATE (NOR IS IT A NEW PROBLEM…)

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Witness statements

I know that Wednesday is the day when we usually focus on witness evidence. However here we look at a case where it was conceded that a statement was, in reality, “more akin to a skeleton argument”.  This is wrong….

THROWBACK FRIDAY: WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON'T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT (FROM JANUARY 2018)

THROWBACK FRIDAY: WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT (FROM JANUARY 2018)

January 23, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Today we go back to a post from January 2018 on a point that remains just as relevant today.   There is a mandatory requirement that a witness give the source of their information and belief.  A surprising number of witness…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A ROBUST OVERTURNING OF THE APPROACH TO THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT FIRST INSTANCE: "GENERALISED FINDINGS ON CREDIBILITY ARE NOT A USEFUL TOOL FOR RESOLVING SPECIFIC ISSUES OF FACT"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A ROBUST OVERTURNING OF THE APPROACH TO THE WITNESS EVIDENCE AT FIRST INSTANCE: “GENERALISED FINDINGS ON CREDIBILITY ARE NOT A USEFUL TOOL FOR RESOLVING SPECIFIC ISSUES OF FACT”

January 21, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

It is unusual to see an appellate court make robust criticisms of the fact finding process at first instance. We have such a judgment here by the Employment Appeal Tribunal.  The EAT made it clear that generalised findings as to…

THE RELEVANCE OF THE ABSENCE OF ORAL EVIDENCE AT INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS: A JUDGE MUST MAKE A DECISION ON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM

THE RELEVANCE OF THE ABSENCE OF ORAL EVIDENCE AT INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATIONS: A JUDGE MUST MAKE A DECISION ON THE EVIDENCE BEFORE THEM

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In this case the claimant appealed against the findings of fact that the court made at first instance. However those findings were made on the basis of written evidence that was before the court.  The claimant had not applied for…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: FINDINGS OF DISHONESTY WERE WRONG AND COULD NOT STAND: ISSUES OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY ARE NOT SIMPLY A MATTER OF "INTUITION"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: FINDINGS OF DISHONESTY WERE WRONG AND COULD NOT STAND: ISSUES OF WITNESS CREDIBILITY ARE NOT SIMPLY A MATTER OF “INTUITION”

January 7, 2026 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we look at a case where, unusually, the judge overturned first instance findings of dishonesty.    The circumstances in which those findings were made were seriously flawed.  Important procedural safeguards had not been in place,  not least the allegations…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 8: PROVING THINGS - OR NOT PROVING THINGS, AS THE CASE MAY BE...

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 8: PROVING THINGS – OR NOT PROVING THINGS, AS THE CASE MAY BE…

December 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The “Proving things” series is the longest running feature of this blog.  Initially I thought it would be a series of then posts. I was planning to end it at a hundred when a chance conversation on the Leeds Legal…

WHEN THE WITNESS STATEMENT OF THE DEFENDANT CONTAINS PASSAGES THAT ARE CUT AND PASTED FROM AN EXPERT'S REPORT: SOMEONE MAY NOTICE THIS...

WHEN THE WITNESS STATEMENT OF THE DEFENDANT CONTAINS PASSAGES THAT ARE CUT AND PASTED FROM AN EXPERT’S REPORT: SOMEONE MAY NOTICE THIS…

December 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

It is clear that many judge’s approach witness statements with a degree of scepticism, regarding them more as a lawyer’s construct than the actual recollection of the witness.  In this case the defendant’s own witness statement included passages that were…

A BREACH OF "PURDAH" OBLIGATIONS WHEN A WITNESS IS GIVING EVIDENCE: MISGUIDED BUT NOT DISHONEST

A BREACH OF “PURDAH” OBLIGATIONS WHEN A WITNESS IS GIVING EVIDENCE: MISGUIDED BUT NOT DISHONEST

December 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

This is a brief reminder of the importance of the obligations of a witness not to communicate with others (including their own legal team) whilst in the course of giving evidence. “This was obviously ill-advised but I accept that, by…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 1: WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY (ON A SUNDAY): STATEMENTS IN 2025: SHAKESPEARE, MONKEY, HALLUCINATIONS AND WITNESSES ANXIOUS TO GIVE THE JUDGE THEIR "OPINION"

REVIEW OF THE YEAR 1: WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY (ON A SUNDAY): STATEMENTS IN 2025: SHAKESPEARE, MONKEY, HALLUCINATIONS AND WITNESSES ANXIOUS TO GIVE THE JUDGE THEIR “OPINION”

December 7, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The white book regularly contains a warning about drafting witness statements  “Periodically, the Court of Appeal and individual trial judges have criticised lawyers for overloading witness statements with material that should not be included.”    This year has seen a…

THE HILLSBOROUGH REPORT AND THE AMENDMENT OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NEW INFORMATION IN THE IPOC REPORT PUBLISHED YESTERDAY

THE HILLSBOROUGH REPORT AND THE AMENDMENT OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NEW INFORMATION IN THE IPOC REPORT PUBLISHED YESTERDAY

December 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked at the issues relating to evidence gathering and the Hillsborough tragedy several times, in particular the way that witness statements were gathered, and the reports amended.  The issues were considered again in the Independent Office for…

PROVING THINGS 274: A WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD NOT BE RESPONSIVE TO AND COMMENT UPON THE OTHER SIDE'S STATEMENTS: FAILURE TO COMPLY HAS CONSEQUENCES

PROVING THINGS 274: A WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD NOT BE RESPONSIVE TO AND COMMENT UPON THE OTHER SIDE’S STATEMENTS: FAILURE TO COMPLY HAS CONSEQUENCES

November 27, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

It is surprisingly common to see witness statements that “comment” on aspects of the case rather than give evidence.  This clearly breaches the rules relating to witness statements. Further it can lead to adverse consequences for those who make such…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A JUDGE ASKING A WITNESS TO CLARIFY THEIR EVIDENCE IS NOT "BIASED" : "JUDGES ARE NOT PASSIVE SPECTATORS AT A TRIAL"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: A JUDGE ASKING A WITNESS TO CLARIFY THEIR EVIDENCE IS NOT “BIASED” : “JUDGES ARE NOT PASSIVE SPECTATORS AT A TRIAL”

November 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

This week we are looking at an appeal that considers the trial judge’s consideration of witnesses at trial.  The appellant alleged that the judge was biased and the trial therefore unfair.  There is a detailed consideration of the “bias” alleged…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHAT SHOULD A JUDGE DO WHEN THE FACTS ARE DISPUTED BUT WITNESSES ARE NOT CALLED TO GIVE EVIDENCE?

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHAT SHOULD A JUDGE DO WHEN THE FACTS ARE DISPUTED BUT WITNESSES ARE NOT CALLED TO GIVE EVIDENCE?

November 19, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

What is a judge to do if there is a dispute as to the facts but neither party calls evidence and there is no cross-examination?   That is the question considered here. (How can a judge determine which witness is correct…

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

THE SOLICITOR AND THE STING OPERATION (2): WHY THE JUDGE DID NOT ACCEPT THAT THE CLAIMANTS WERE UNAWARE OF THE STRATEGY BEING USED

November 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

We are returning again to the case where the claimants arranged the taping of meetings with the defendants’ solicitors.  The judge was sceptical of the claimants’ assertions that they were not fully aware of the methods being used. (This case…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: DISTILLING THE GESTMIN GUIDELINES: WHICH WITNESS WILL BE BELIEVED? (AND WHAT PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE ACCEPTED?)

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: DISTILLING THE GESTMIN GUIDELINES: WHICH WITNESS WILL BE BELIEVED? (AND WHAT PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE ACCEPTED?)

November 5, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Over the past month or so there have been at least half a dozen cases where the judge references Gestmin – the consideration and guidance given to judicial fact finding, particularly in relation to witness evidence. These range from actions…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW JUDGES DECIDE CIVIL CASES: "JUDGES ARE HUMAN. THEY DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS"

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW JUDGES DECIDE CIVIL CASES: “JUDGES ARE HUMAN. THEY DO NOT POSSESS SUPERNATURAL POWERS”

October 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This week we are looking at a judgment that sets out in detail the process by which judges determine issues in a civil case. Ranging from the burden and standard of proof , the role of judges, the fallibility of…

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF...

EXPERT WATCH 22: JUST WHEN YOU THINK YOU MAY HAVE SEEN IT ALL: THE CLIENT (BASICALLY) DRAFTS THE JOINT STATEMENT: THE JUDGE THINKS THEY MAY HAVE PLAYED A LARGE PART IN THE DRAFTING OF THE REPORT ITSELF…

October 28, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

No matter how long, and how much, you write about civil procedure cases can still come along which surprise – if not astonish. We have such a case here.  The judge found that, essentially, it was the client who played…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE DUTY TO PUT YOUR CASE TO A WITNESS: THE PRINCIPLES SUMMARISED IN THE HIGH COURT

October 22, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Earlier this week we looked at a case where difficulties occurred because the claimant’s case was not put to a witness for the defendant.    Here I want to highlight the key parts  of that judgment relating to the need…

(NOT) PROVING THINGS 272: AN ABSENT WITNESS LEADS TO ADVERSE INFERENCES BEING DRAWN: PROBLEM OCCUR WHEN YOUR CASE AT TRIAL IS WHOLLY DIFFERENT TO THE PLEADED CASE

(NOT) PROVING THINGS 272: AN ABSENT WITNESS LEADS TO ADVERSE INFERENCES BEING DRAWN: PROBLEM OCCUR WHEN YOUR CASE AT TRIAL IS WHOLLY DIFFERENT TO THE PLEADED CASE

October 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Many people have noted that the argument that the court should draw adverse inferences from the absence of key witnesses is often bypassed by the courts, with judges preferring to base their decisions on the evidence of witnesses that are…

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: "THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT"

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE UNDER SCRUTINY, ADMISSIBILITY AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED: “THE PROVIDING OF PATENTLY UNTRUE WITNESS STATEMENTS TO THE COURT, ENDORSED WITH STATEMENTS OF TRUTH, IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN TO THE COURT”

October 9, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury

This is the most  serious criticism of surveillance operatives as I have seen.  The judge found that the operatives, filming on behalf of a defendant for the purpose of litigation,  had been “fundamental and repeated” errors. The operatives then put…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: GUIDANCE FOR THOSE WHO TAKE THEM AND THOSE WHO SUPERVISE THEM: WEBINAR 15th OCTOBER 2025

WITNESS STATEMENTS: GUIDANCE FOR THOSE WHO TAKE THEM AND THOSE WHO SUPERVISE THEM: WEBINAR 15th OCTOBER 2025

October 8, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Webinar, Witness statements

On a regular basis on this blog we see cases where judges have been highly critical of the witness statements used at trials or hearings.  This criticism is not a rare event and is usually justified. Many witness statements are…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW NUMEROUS SMALL REPETITIONS, AND UNEVIDENCED CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES UNDERMINE THE CREDIBILITY OF THE CASE

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: HOW NUMEROUS SMALL REPETITIONS, AND UNEVIDENCED CLAIMS FOR DAMAGES UNDERMINE THE CREDIBILITY OF THE CASE

October 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we are looking at a judgment in a group litigation claim where the judge had to assess the evidence of numerous witnesses. The feature I want to look at is the way in which claims for damages were put…

PROVING THINGS 269: PROVING THAT A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST: IS TURNING A "BLIND EYE" ENOUGH?

PROVING THINGS 269: PROVING THAT A SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST: IS TURNING A “BLIND EYE” ENOUGH?

September 29, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

NB THIS DECISION THAT THE SOLICITOR WAS DISHONEST WAS OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL SEE  Grosvenor Property Developers Ltd v Portner Law Ltd [2026] EWCA Civ 1238 (02 October 2026) This is an important and interesting case about findings…

EXPERT WATCH 13: "IT SUGGESTS THE WITNESS WAS SEEKING TO BUILD A CASE FOR THE CLAIMANTS RATHER THAN INDEPENDENTLY ANALYSE THE EVIDENCE IN REACHING HIS OPINION": THE JUDGE FINDS THIS TROUBLING

EXPERT WATCH 13: “IT SUGGESTS THE WITNESS WAS SEEKING TO BUILD A CASE FOR THE CLAIMANTS RATHER THAN INDEPENDENTLY ANALYSE THE EVIDENCE IN REACHING HIS OPINION”: THE JUDGE FINDS THIS TROUBLING

September 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Here we are looking a judicial observations about the role of forensic reconstruction experts.  There are telling comments on the reasons the judge preferred one expert over another. Again it comes down to a simple failure to consider  and apply…

WHEN A WITNESS COULD NOT SPEAK ENGLISH: A STATEMENT PREPARED SO BADLY THAT AN ADJOURNMENT WAS NECESSARY

September 24, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

It is fitting that on witness evidence Wednesday we are also  looking at a case where there was a wholesale failure to comply with the rules relating to evidence from those whose primary language is not English.  The breaches in…

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: "HIS EVIDENCE WAS FREQUENTLY AGGRESSIVE AND SARCASTIC": SOMETIMES WITNESSES DO NOT HELP THEMSELVES

WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: “HIS EVIDENCE WAS FREQUENTLY AGGRESSIVE AND SARCASTIC”: SOMETIMES WITNESSES DO NOT HELP THEMSELVES

September 17, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I have been considering a series on judicial observations on witness evidence for some time. It seems like a good idea to put this in the middle of the week so we have a regular reminder of how significant these…

WITNESSES WHO GIVE THE COURT THE BENEFIT OF THEIR "OPINION": I'M NOT SAYING IT LED DIRECTLY TO THE APPLICANT LOSING THIS CASE - BUT IT DID NOT HELP...

WITNESSES WHO GIVE THE COURT THE BENEFIT OF THEIR “OPINION”: I’M NOT SAYING IT LED DIRECTLY TO THE APPLICANT LOSING THIS CASE – BUT IT DID NOT HELP…

September 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There appears to be no end to the practice of witnesses giving the court the benefit of their opinion in witness statements. There have been numerous cases where the judiciary have warned against this.  The white book has a specific…

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT COULD BE DRAFTED TO "POINT OF NEAR HOMOGENEITY" DID NOT IMPRESS THE COURT (AT THE COSTS BUDGETING STAGE - AND PROBABLY FAR BEYOND...)

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT COULD BE DRAFTED TO “POINT OF NEAR HOMOGENEITY” DID NOT IMPRESS THE COURT (AT THE COSTS BUDGETING STAGE – AND PROBABLY FAR BEYOND…)

September 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we look at some interesting observations made about the process of drafting witness statements. The court was budgeting the process and considering an argument that there should be “numerous reviews and peer-reviews” during the process of drafting the statements….

THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 1: WHERE DO YOU LOOK IF YOU WANT TO REFER TO A WITNESS STATEMENT SERVED BY YOUR OPPONENT BUT THEY ARE NOT CALLING THAT WITNESS?

THE CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF TOOLBOX SERIES 1: WHERE DO YOU LOOK IF YOU WANT TO REFER TO A WITNESS STATEMENT SERVED BY YOUR OPPONENT BUT THEY ARE NOT CALLING THAT WITNESS?

September 4, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The aim of this series is to give practitioners a quick place to look if they are placed in a sudden dilemma. The issue here, which can arise at short (or no) notice is what should a party (“A”) do…

ANOTHER CASE WHERE A WITNESS STATEMENT WAS SERVED BUT THE WITNESS DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL: THE DEFENDANT HAD USED PARTS OF THE STATEMENT IN CROSS EXAMINATION - WHAT WAS ITS STATUS?

ANOTHER CASE WHERE A WITNESS STATEMENT WAS SERVED BUT THE WITNESS DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL: THE DEFENDANT HAD USED PARTS OF THE STATEMENT IN CROSS EXAMINATION – WHAT WAS ITS STATUS?

August 26, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

We are looking at another case where a party served a witness statement and yet the witness did not attend trial, the court only being told of this at the end of the trial itself.  In this case the statement…

ABSENT WITNESSES AND ADVERSE INFERENCES (AGAIN): WE DON'T WANT TO PAY YOU THE US$1,911,877,385 YOU ARE CLAIMING: BUT WE WON'T GIVE EVIDENCE

ABSENT WITNESSES AND ADVERSE INFERENCES (AGAIN): WE DON’T WANT TO PAY YOU THE US$1,911,877,385 YOU ARE CLAIMING: BUT WE WON’T GIVE EVIDENCE

August 11, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

We are continuing with looking at the consequences of a party failing to call witnesses, or, as in this case, give no evidence of fact at all.  In this case the judge had no difficulty in stating his views as…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 2: OVER TWO WEEKS IN COURT, A PANOPALY OF EXPERTS – BUT THE CASE CAME DOWN TO “WHO SAID WHAT TO WHO?”

July 25, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

The principles relating to clinical negligence cases are well known. The major problem is usually determining the facts. In cases that involve a disputed recollection of what was said and asked in medical consultations this gives rise to major issues. …

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THE WITNESS HAS NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE MATTERS THEY RELY ON: HE "SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THE UNDERLYING DOCUMENTS HIMSELF".

DRAFTING WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THE WITNESS HAS NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE MATTERS THEY RELY ON: HE “SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THE UNDERLYING DOCUMENTS HIMSELF”.

July 21, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There is an apparently never ending series of cases in which witness statements are used in circumstances where, in reality, the maker of that statement has no first hand knowledge of the matters stated. This often only becomes apparent at…

OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS CAN LEAD TO CROSS EXAMINATION "DEGENERATING INTO AN ARGUMENT": THE LIMITED WEIGHT THAT A JUDGE CAN PLACE ON HEARSAY EVIDENCE

OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS CAN LEAD TO CROSS EXAMINATION “DEGENERATING INTO AN ARGUMENT”: THE LIMITED WEIGHT THAT A JUDGE CAN PLACE ON HEARSAY EVIDENCE

July 10, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to barrister Jack Macaulay for bringing my attention to the case we are looking at here.  I refer people to Jack’s detailed summary of the issues below. However, here,  I want to concentrate on two aspects of…

WHEN HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF AS TRAGEDY & FARCE: GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS, MAKING WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF

WHEN HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF AS TRAGEDY & FARCE: GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS, MAKING WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF

July 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The post earlier today on the need for MI5 operatives to give the source of their information and belief has a ring of “intrigue” about it. James Bond, we now know, cannot simply declaim something to be true. However, as…

SPIES, LIES, INTRIGUE - AND A BASIC FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES RELATING TO WITNESS STATEMENTS: GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF (WE'VE COVERED THIS MANY TIMES BEFORE...)

SPIES, LIES, INTRIGUE – AND A BASIC FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES RELATING TO WITNESS STATEMENTS: GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF (WE’VE COVERED THIS MANY TIMES BEFORE…)

July 3, 2025 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Witness statements

Here we have a case about MI5, spies and lies.  However this is a site about civil procedure and evidence so we are  largely bypassing the intrigue and lies (but not the potential of a finding of contempt of court) …

WITNESS STATEMENTS DRAFTED WITH CARELESSNESS AND WITHOUT APPRECIATION OF THEIR SIGNIFICANCE: "A FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE AND STATUS OF WRITTEN EVIDENCE"

WITNESS STATEMENTS DRAFTED WITH CARELESSNESS AND WITHOUT APPRECIATION OF THEIR SIGNIFICANCE: “A FAILURE TO UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE AND STATUS OF WRITTEN EVIDENCE”

July 2, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The preparation of witness statements is an essential part of the stock in trade for most litigators.  It is surprising how often statements are ill prepared, they are a regular feature of this site. We see examples here when the…

WITNESS STATEMENTS ANOTHER FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PD57AC: A "WAIT AND SEE" STRATEGY MAY BE DANGEROUS:  NON-COMPLIANCE  GREATLY REDUCES THE WEIGHT OF THE STATEMENTS

WITNESS STATEMENTS ANOTHER FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PD57AC: A “WAIT AND SEE” STRATEGY MAY BE DANGEROUS: NON-COMPLIANCE GREATLY REDUCES THE WEIGHT OF THE STATEMENTS

July 1, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Earlier we looked at a case where a party was not allowed to recover the costs of obtaining non-compliant witness statements. Here we are looking at a case where both sides did not comply with PD57AC.  The claimant, aware of…

← Previous 1 2 3 … 11 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

  • COST BITES 448: PART 36 AND FIXED COSTS: “VERY LATE” ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT’S OFFER LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING NO COSTS AT ALL
  • COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
  • SERVICE POINTS 56 : PERSONAL SERVICE NOT EFFECTED: COURT RETROSPECTIVELY APPROVES ALTERNATIVE SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS IN CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
  • DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU COULD BE MADE BANKRUPT (OSTENSIBLY ON YOUR OWN APPLICATION), NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT – AND THEN HAVE TO PAY THE TRUSTEE’S COSTS? THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING KEY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: A CASE WHERE THE SOLICITORS’ EVIDENCE (OF THEIR OWN) LOSS WAS “WHOLLY INADEQUATE” (OCTOBER 2017)

Top Posts

COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
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...)
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...
COST BITES 466: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ABILITY TO AWARD INTEREST ON COSTS TO LITIGANTS CONDUCTING LITIGATION ON A CFA

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.