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 4
WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: "DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE"

WITNESS STATEMENTS IN THE DOCK AGAIN: “DESPITE HAVING EXPRESSLY ADOPTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN EVIDENCE IN CHIEF [HE] COULD NOT CONFIRM THAT IT REPRESENTED HIS EVIDENCE”

February 25, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Moulder in PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors [2021] EWHC 411 (Comm) provides a further example of the contention that obtaining witness evidence is  probably not part of the “stock in trade” of those who…

"Closing argument was in writing: an eye-glazing, bum-numbing, disc-herniating total of 662 pages (single-spaced, medium-sized font and heavily footnoted)": A good time to repeat one of our favourite cases...

“Closing argument was in writing: an eye-glazing, bum-numbing, disc-herniating total of 662 pages (single-spaced, medium-sized font and heavily footnoted)”: A good time to repeat one of our favourite cases…

February 21, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Periodically I feel bound to remind people  of the case of The Hearing Clinic (Niagara Falls) Inc -v- Ontario Ltd, Lewis & Lewis 2014 ONAC 5831 (CanLii) a decision of Mr Justice J.W.Quinn.   In the middle of “lockdown”, when we may well…

ANOTHER UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO SQUEEZE EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT

ANOTHER UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO SQUEEZE EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT

February 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

A common search term that leads to this blog is “opinion evidence in witness statements”,  this remains a major issue in many areas of practice.  It can be seen in the judgment of HHJ Hacon in Penhallurick v MD5 Ltd…

THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE WITNESS STATEMENTS: TURN DOWN £60,000 AND PAY OUT £90,000 INSTEAD...

THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE WITNESS STATEMENTS: TURN DOWN £60,000 AND PAY OUT £90,000 INSTEAD…

February 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Well being, Witness statements

One case that exemplifies the dangers of taking an “incomplete” witness statement is the decision of Judge Keyser Q.C. In Kellie & Kellie -v- Wheatley & Lloyd Architects Ltd [2014] EWHC 2866(TCC.  This case  gives a working example of the…

WHY CAN’T YOU ASK LEADING QUESTIONS IN COURT (AND WHY SHOULDN’T YOU DO IT WHEN PREPARING A WITNESS STATEMENT)

January 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

A search term that led to this blog today was “why can’t the case presenter or representative can ask his witness leading questions during evidence-in – chief?”  Examination in chief is rare in civil cases.   The dangers of asking leading…

PROVING THINGS 192: WHEN A WITNESS GIVES EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT TOOK PLACE 50 YEARS AGO: HOW THE JUDGE WEIGHS THE EVIDENCE

PROVING THINGS 192: WHEN A WITNESS GIVES EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT TOOK PLACE 50 YEARS AGO: HOW THE JUDGE WEIGHS THE EVIDENCE

December 14, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

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…

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT REQUIRE TRANSLATION OR WHERE THE MAKER IS NOT LITERATE: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES IS NOT SIMPLY A “TECHNICAL BREACH”

December 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Diamond v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2020] EWHC 3313 Mr Justice Calver considered the weight to be attached to witness statements that did not comply with the Civil Procedure Rules.   The case shows why everyone should…

A BARRISTER OF “GOOD JUDGEMENT”: WHEN THE PERSON WHO USUALLY DOES THE CROSS-EXAMINING IS IN THE WITNESS BOX

December 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Torrance v Bradberry [2020] EWHC 3260 (QB) is one that should be read by every practising lawyer. It is a case of a lawyer as defendant, being accused of negligence in their conduct…

"LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING": A REMINDER OF ITS IMPORTANCE

“LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”: A REMINDER OF ITS IMPORTANCE

September 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked many times at those cases where a case is determined by the judge’s assessment of the credibility of the witnesses.  This does not always (or event often) mean that the losing side are not telling the…

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY A "REASONING PROCESS VITIATED BY AT LEAST THREE FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS OF APPROACH": HIGH COURT LAYS DOWN THE LAW

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY A “REASONING PROCESS VITIATED BY AT LEAST THREE FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS OF APPROACH”: HIGH COURT LAYS DOWN THE LAW

July 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Dutta, R (On the Application Of) v General Medical Council (GMC) [2020] EWHC 1974 (Admin) Mr Justice Warby set out a powerful critique of the reasoning given by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal.   The judgment contains an essential summary of…

WHEN WITNESS EVIDENCE GOES OFF TRACK: CREDIBILITY SPRINTS AWAY

July 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are several recent cases where judges deal with the issue of credibility and witnesses.  The first we are looking it is the decision of HHJ Melissa Clarke in British Amateur Gymnastics Association v UK Gymnastics Ltd & Ors [2020]…

WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS?  A REVIEW OF THE CASES

WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS? A REVIEW OF THE CASES

July 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Last week I gave an in-house talk to a London firm of solicitors.*  One of the matters we discussed was when (if ever) it was appropriate for a solicitor to make a witness statement in support of an interlocutory application. …

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: A DUTY TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST AND SCRUPULOUSLY ACCURATE

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: A DUTY TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST AND SCRUPULOUSLY ACCURATE

June 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

There are particular dangers for solicitors giving evidence.  This morning I wrote about the common (but totally wrong) practice of solicitors using witness statements to argue points of law.  In Ras Al Khaimah Investment Authority v Azima [2020] EWHC 1686…

WITNESS STATEMENTS "NOT IN MY STOCK IN TRADE": HIGH COURT JUDGE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ARGUMENTATIVE AND LARGELY IRRELEVANT WITNESS STATEMENTS

WITNESS STATEMENTS “NOT IN MY STOCK IN TRADE”: HIGH COURT JUDGE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ARGUMENTATIVE AND LARGELY IRRELEVANT WITNESS STATEMENTS

June 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Summary judgment, 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

WITNESS STATEMENTS: EDITED HIGHLIGHTS OF THE REPORT OF THE WITNESS EVIDENCE WORKING GROUP: THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS

June 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE, ALLEGATIONS OF MALINGERING AND INDEMNITY COSTS (AGAINST THE DEFENDANT)

SURVEILLANCE EVIDENCE, ALLEGATIONS OF MALINGERING AND INDEMNITY COSTS (AGAINST THE DEFENDANT)

June 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Costs, Members Content

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-…

OPINION EVIDENCE AND DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED AT TRIAL

OPINION EVIDENCE AND DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED AT TRIAL

June 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Harlow -v- Aspect Contracts Ltd [2020] EWHC 1488 (TCC) Alexander Nissen QC (sitting as a High Court judge) allowed an application preventing the defendant relying on a witness statement that was, in reality, an attempt to give expert evidence. …

COVID REPEATS 43: FAREPAK: "A DOCUMENT CREATED IN THE LANGUAGE OF LAWYERS BY THE LAWYERS"

COVID REPEATS 43: FAREPAK: “A DOCUMENT CREATED IN THE LANGUAGE OF LAWYERS BY THE LAWYERS”

June 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

COVID REPEATS 41: OFFICE GOSSIP IS NOT EVIDENCE

June 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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…

COVID REPEATS 40: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS IS GOING TO END BADLY: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE (& THEN 10 MORE)

COVID REPEATS 40: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS IS GOING TO END BADLY: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE (& THEN 10 MORE)

June 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This week we are looking at witness statements and the process of gathering witness evidence. In August 2015 I wrote at length about the judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Susan Saunderson & Others -v- Sonae Industria (UK) Ltd [2015] EWCA…

WITNESS STATEMENTS FULL OF VITRIOL - THIS IS NEVER GOING TO END WELL...

WITNESS STATEMENTS FULL OF VITRIOL – THIS IS NEVER GOING TO END WELL…

May 28, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The “Covid Repeats” series next week will revisit some of those (many) cases where judges have found witness statements to be inadequate.  The inclusion of unnecessary matters in witness statements is a continuing issue. It can be seen in the…

LIES, DAMN LIES AND LITIGATION: WHY PEOPLE TELL LIES AND WHAT DOES THE JUDGE DO? (A RECAP)

LIES, DAMN LIES AND LITIGATION: WHY PEOPLE TELL LIES AND WHAT DOES THE JUDGE DO? (A RECAP)

May 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

For various reasons issues relating to the credibility of witnesses and “lies” are in the news this week. Litigation is not always about  lies or liars. Often it is about misunderstandings, mistaken recollection and people convincing themselves that they are correct….

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY:  A REMINDER OF THE BASIC PRINCIPLES

ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A REMINDER OF THE BASIC PRINCIPLES

May 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Today is  is a good day to look  again at the judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt in Gestmin SGPS S.A. -v- Credit Suisse [2013] EWCA 3560 (Comm).  This is case that is now mentioned regularly in cases involving witness recollection and…

COVID REPEATS 30: THE LYING WITNESS: THE APPROACH OF THE CIVIL COURTS

COVID REPEATS 30: THE LYING WITNESS: THE APPROACH OF THE CIVIL COURTS

May 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

We are going back to what was the most widely read post on this blog in 2017 and 2018. It is about witnesses telling lies.Mr Justice Smith has observed that “witnesses can regularly lie”.  How do lies impact upon the…

PROVING THINGS 176: RELYING ON MEMORY FROM EVENTS A LONG TIME BACK

PROVING THINGS 176: RELYING ON MEMORY FROM EVENTS A LONG TIME BACK

May 19, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to David Platt QC  for sending me a copy of the judgment given today of Geoffrey Tattersall QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in  Bannister -v- Freemans Public Limited Company [2020] EWHC 1256 (QB).  …

THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS HAVE "FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS": BACK TO BASICS FROM MR JUSTICE WAKSMAN

THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS HAVE “FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS”: BACK TO BASICS FROM MR JUSTICE WAKSMAN

May 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am returning to more traditional territory in looking at the judgment of Mr Justice Waksman in PCP Capital Partners LLP & Anor v Barclays Bank Plc [2020] EWHC 646 (Comm).  Witness evidence and witness statements have been a regular…

COVID REPEATS 16: THE DOG THAT GOT A BETTER MASTER'S DEGREE THAN A WITNESS (WHEN WITNESSES DIG REALLY DEEP HOLES FOR THEMSELVES)

COVID REPEATS 16: THE DOG THAT GOT A BETTER MASTER’S DEGREE THAN A WITNESS (WHEN WITNESSES DIG REALLY DEEP HOLES FOR THEMSELVES)

May 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Coronavirus, Members Content, Well being, Witness statements

To lighten up a Saturday we are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Ramsey in BSky B -v- HP Enterprises Ltd [2010] EWHC 86 (TCC). This contains some interesting comments on the credibility of witnesses and how the…

COVID REPEATS 13: "CLOSING ARGUMENT WAS ... AND EYE-GLAZING, BUM-NUMBING, DISC-HERNIATING TOTAL OF 662 PAGES"

COVID REPEATS 13: “CLOSING ARGUMENT WAS … AND EYE-GLAZING, BUM-NUMBING, DISC-HERNIATING TOTAL OF 662 PAGES”

May 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Coronavirus, Members Content, Witness statements

For this repeat we are staying with Mr Justice J.W. Quinn, this time looking at his judgment in  The Hearing Clinic (Niagara Falls) Inc -v- Ontario Ltd, Lewis & Lewis 2014 ONAC 5831 (CanLii) It is a judgment worth looking at again, not…

REMOTE HEARINGS: BUT WHAT ABOUT "WITNESS DEMEANOUR"?

REMOTE HEARINGS: BUT WHAT ABOUT “WITNESS DEMEANOUR”?

March 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Coronavirus, Members Content, Remote hearings, Witness statements

One of the issues that has been raised in objection to “remote” hearings is the question of witness demeanour.  In modern litigation recent case law suggests that this is not a major factor in any event.   “No doubt it…

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: THE STANDARD OF PROOF FOR DISHONESTY:  ALSO DELAY OF 22 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT UNACCEPTABLE

COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT: THE STANDARD OF PROOF FOR DISHONESTY: ALSO DELAY OF 22 MONTHS IN GIVING JUDGMENT UNACCEPTABLE

March 18, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

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…

GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: NOT A MERE TECHNICALITY: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES CAN HAVE MAJOR CONSEQUENCES

GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: NOT A MERE TECHNICALITY: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES CAN HAVE MAJOR CONSEQUENCES

March 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has dealt, many times, with the difficulties  that  can arise when a solicitor makes a witness statement in support of an interlocutory application.  Not least there is a duty to give details of the source of information and…

THE PROBLEMS THAT CAN OCCUR WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A STATEMENT ON THEIR CLIENT'S BEHALF: "I ATTACH NO WEIGHT TO WHAT HE SAYS"

THE PROBLEMS THAT CAN OCCUR WHEN A LAWYER MAKES A STATEMENT ON THEIR CLIENT’S BEHALF: “I ATTACH NO WEIGHT TO WHAT HE SAYS”

March 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at the pitfalls that can occur when lawyers make statements on behalf of their clients.  An example can be seen in the judge of Mr Justice Edis in Cobussen Principal Investment Holdings Ltd v…

THE PRODUCTION  OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NOW BEING SUBJECT TO RESEARCH: CAN YOU HELP?

THE PRODUCTION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NOW BEING SUBJECT TO RESEARCH: CAN YOU HELP?

January 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at issues relating to the drafting of witness statements.   The Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research is carrying out research on this subject, in the context of witness evidence in employment tribunals, “Taking…

GIVING EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT HAPPENED 17 YEARS EARLIER: AN EXAMPLE IN THE CONTEXT OF CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE

GIVING EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT HAPPENED 17 YEARS EARLIER: AN EXAMPLE IN THE CONTEXT OF CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE

January 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked at the issues relating to memory and witness evidence many times.  Particularly the problems of people giving evidence many years after the event. An example of these difficulties can be seen in the judgment of Mrs…

ATTEMPTING TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN SUBMISSIONS AND SUBMISSIONS IN EVIDENCE: SHOULD THE TWAIN EVER MEET?

ATTEMPTING TO GIVE EVIDENCE IN SUBMISSIONS AND SUBMISSIONS IN EVIDENCE: SHOULD THE TWAIN EVER MEET?

January 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The  recent post on the Post Office case and the defendant’s attempts to introduce new evidence at the submissions stage has caused me to revisit a post from several years ago.  This was, in turn, caused by a recollection of…

PROVING THINGS 170: YOU CAN'T GIVE EVIDENCE BY WAY OF SUBMISSIONS (HONESTLY, YOU CAN'T)

PROVING THINGS 170: YOU CAN’T GIVE EVIDENCE BY WAY OF SUBMISSIONS (HONESTLY, YOU CAN’T)

January 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

One important aspect of the judgment in Bates & Ors v the Post Office Ltd (No 6: Horizon Issues) [2019] EWHC 3408 (QB) is the judge’s criticism of the defendant’s attempt to give “evidence” at the stage of closing submissions….

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: TO WHAT EXTENT IS "HYPOTHETICAL" EVIDENCE FROM DOCTORS ADMISSIBLE?

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: TO WHAT EXTENT IS “HYPOTHETICAL” EVIDENCE FROM DOCTORS ADMISSIBLE?

December 19, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert in AB v East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust [2019] EWHC 3542 (QB), provides an important lessons for those who draft witness statements, particularly on behalf of defendants in clinical negligence cases.   The question is…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995

December 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

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.  …

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE - THE YEAR IN REVIEW (4): FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (4): FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY

December 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content

There have been relatively few cases about fundamental dishonesty this year.   However the cases that have been reported have all been interesting.  The first involves a failing adverse to the defendant. The second highlights the point that there is no…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 72:  THE EXPERT'S DUTY TO LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE AND GIVE REASONS FOR THEIR VIEWS (A MANDATORY OBLIGATION MORE HONOURED IN THE BREACH...)

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 72: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE AND GIVE REASONS FOR THEIR VIEWS (A MANDATORY OBLIGATION MORE HONOURED IN THE BREACH…)

November 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The recent post on the decision in Ashley Wilde Group Ltd v BCPL Ltd [2019] EWHC 3166 (IPEC) highlights a common omission from many expert reports. The expert’s duty to consider whether there is a range of opinion and to give…

WHEN WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: THIS RARELY TURNS OUT WELL: (WHEN THEY SIGN THE SAME STATEMENT, IT COULD BE WORSE...)

WHEN WITNESSES ALL SAY THE SAME THING: THIS RARELY TURNS OUT WELL: (WHEN THEY SIGN THE SAME STATEMENT, IT COULD BE WORSE…)

November 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There has been a brief exchange on Twitter this morning. Someone has been served with a  single witness statement  – signed by three people.  There are manifest breaches of the rules here.  It is another example of a statement being…

PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT'S WITNESSES

PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESSES

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Witness statements

There are a number of interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Coe in Esegbona v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (false imprisonment in hospital) [2019] EWHC 77 (QB). One of which is the defendant’s failure to call any…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 69 : SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE LITIGATOR: A RECAP

November 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

The earlier post on the judgment last  Jet 2 Holidays Ltd v Hughes & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1858 was another case in which social media played a part.  The defendant holiday company found social media entries which appeared inconsistent…

PROVING THINGS 166:  LYING  IN COURT (& HOW THE JUDGE DECIDES WHO IS...)

PROVING THINGS 166: LYING IN COURT (& HOW THE JUDGE DECIDES WHO IS…)

October 27, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

A search term led someone to this blog today “how is it legal to get away with lying in court”.  There is a whole host of material on the question of what is a “lie”, compared to a false or…

HEATED LANGUAGE AND CAREFULLY CRAFTED WITNESS STATEMENTS: "METAPHORS OF WAR" RARELY (IF EVER) HELP IN LITIGATION

HEATED LANGUAGE AND CAREFULLY CRAFTED WITNESS STATEMENTS: “METAPHORS OF WAR” RARELY (IF EVER) HELP IN LITIGATION

October 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Alesco Risk Management Services Ltd & Ors v Bishopsgate Insurance Brokers Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 2839 (QB) Mr Justice Freedman considered the language used in witness statements.  The heat generated by intemperate language rarely helped the litigants involved….

THE "BAD SINGING" CASE GETS TWO ENCORES: JUDGE FAILED TO MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT ON KEY ISSUES

THE “BAD SINGING” CASE GETS TWO ENCORES: JUDGE FAILED TO MAKE FINDINGS OF FACT ON KEY ISSUES

October 15, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I wrote about the first instance decision in Kogan v Martin & Ors [2019] EWCA Civ 1645 here.  The Court of Appeal have ordered a retrial in the case.   There are important observations about the role of the judge in…

WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RECORD THEIR MEETING WITH AN EXPERT WITNESS? TWO EXAMPLES WHERE THE COURT'S FOUND THAT AN EXPERT'S STATEMENT OF AN INTERVIEW WAS UNRELIABLE

WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RECORD THEIR MEETING WITH AN EXPERT WITNESS? TWO EXAMPLES WHERE THE COURT’S FOUND THAT AN EXPERT’S STATEMENT OF AN INTERVIEW WAS UNRELIABLE

October 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

An earlier post dealt with the case of Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) and the claimant’s decision to record her appointments with the defendant’s medical experts.  The issue of what, precisely, was said to an expert can…

THE HONEST WITNESS WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ACCEPTED - BUT WHO STILL WON HER CASE: A CLOSE ANALYSIS OF  THE LAY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN MORDEL

THE HONEST WITNESS WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ACCEPTED – BUT WHO STILL WON HER CASE: A CLOSE ANALYSIS OF THE LAY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN MORDEL

October 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

The result of the judgment today  in Mordel v Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2591 (QB) has already been well publicised.  A mother succeeded in her claim that the defendant trust was negligent in failing to check her…

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT'S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

LAWYERS GIVING EVIDENCE 4: SOME COURTS MAY TAKE INTO ACCOUNT A CLIENT’S FAILURE TO GIVE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE

October 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This series looks at the question of when, if ever, it is appropriate for a solicitor to swear an affidavit or make a statement in place of the client? This issue was considered by Stanley Burnton J in Bracken Partners…

LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS SUMMARIES: HERE'S AN INGENIOUS ARGUMENT - THAT DIDN'T WORK: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FROM PARTIES OWN WITNESS ALSO REFUSED

LATE SERVICE OF WITNESS SUMMARIES: HERE’S AN INGENIOUS ARGUMENT – THAT DIDN’T WORK: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE FROM PARTIES OWN WITNESS ALSO REFUSED

September 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Smith & Anor v Crawshay [2019] EWHC 2507 (Ch)  HHJ Paul Matthews considered an argument that the defendant was allowed to rely on a witness summary.  He also refused permission to adduce further evidence in evidence-in-chief from a witness…

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 10 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 : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)
  • PRACTICE DIRECTION CHANGES INTRODUCED YESTERDAY: NEW PROVISIONS IN THE DAMAGES CLAIM PORTAL: “OTHER REMEDY” CLAIMS CAN NOW BE MADE
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 15: THE STUDENTS LOAN COMPANY MAY BE AN “EMANATION OF THE STATE”: SOME INTERESTING ISSUES HERE: THESE ARE ISSUES OF LAW – NOT ONE ON WHICH A WITNESS CAN EXPRESS AN OPINION OR VIEW…
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 14: CLAIMANT FAILS IN SLIPPING CASE: THERE WAS A “HYPOTHETICAL” RISK OF SLIPPING WHICH THE DEFENDANT DID NOT NEED TO DEAL WITH
  • PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 13: WHERE THERE IS BLAME THERE IS NOT ALWAYS A CLAIM: THE DEFENDANT BREACHED THEIR DUTY BUT THE CLAIMANT’S ACTION FAILED

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.