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 6
CROSS-EXAMINATION: THE DUTY TO PUT A CASE: A GEM OF A DECISION

CROSS-EXAMINATION: THE DUTY TO PUT A CASE: A GEM OF A DECISION

November 29, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In W Nagel (A Firm) v Pluczenik Diamond Company NV [2018] EWCA Civ 2640 the Court of Appeal made an important observation about the duty of a cross-examiner to put their client’s case to an opposing witness. This provides an opportunity…

SURVEY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS: WORKING PARTY SURVEY:  A REMINDER OF PAST COMMENTS ... SOME CHESTNUTS HERE

SURVEY ON WITNESS STATEMENTS: WORKING PARTY SURVEY: A REMINDER OF PAST COMMENTS … SOME CHESTNUTS HERE

November 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Useful links, Witness statements

The Witness Evidence Working Group is carrying out a survey of the use of witness statements in the Business & Property Courts.  Here I provide a link to the post and a reminder of the comments that some judges have…

PROVING THINGS 133: FALLING OFF A BED AND THE PIECES OF THE JIGSAW

PROVING THINGS 133: FALLING OFF A BED AND THE PIECES OF THE JIGSAW

November 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

The case of Busby v Berkshire Bed Company Ltd [2018] EWHC 2976 (QB) was one of those cases that centred on credible evidence. It is an example of where witnesses can be totally honest but mistaken in their recollection. The judge…

WHEN WITNESSES DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE SAYING: WHY THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IS IMPORTANT

WHEN WITNESSES DIDN’T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE SAYING: WHY THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IS IMPORTANT

November 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a short passage in the judgment in GPP Big Field LLP & Anor v Solar EPC Solutions SL [2018] EWHC 2866 (Comm) that shows (not for the first time this year) that those responsible for drafting witness statements often…

EXTENSIVE WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT WAS OF NO USE: A COMMON FINDING

EXTENSIVE WITNESS EVIDENCE THAT WAS OF NO USE: A COMMON FINDING

November 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Witness statements

We have already looked at the judgment of Mrs Justice Cockerill in  Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm). It is worth looking at what the judge had to say about the witness evidence before…

UNDERSTANDING THE CODED LANGUAGE OF THE LEGAL DIRECTORIES: HUMBLEBRAGS AND BEYOND

UNDERSTANDING THE CODED LANGUAGE OF THE LEGAL DIRECTORIES: HUMBLEBRAGS AND BEYOND

November 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Case Management, Charity, Civil evidence, Members Content

This if the time of year that several legal directories are published.  It leads to an inevitable pattern of behaviour.  Thanks to law lecturer John Bates we can all now understand the coded language of the legal directory. THE PATTERN…

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: THE COURTS SAY IT AGAIN - NOT TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY

THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: THE COURTS SAY IT AGAIN – NOT TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY

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

In Recovery Partners GP Ltd & Anor v Rukhadze & Ors [2018] EWHC 2918 (Comm) Mrs Justice Cockerill provides a clear and stark reminder of the significance of the statement of truth and need for all relevant parties to sign it….

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF: 10 KEY POINTS THAT LITIGATORS SHOULD KNOW: A JUDGE MAKE GET A BIT IRKED IF YOU TRY TO USURP THEIR ROLE

October 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The post earlier today on the deficiencies in a witness statement  that led to it being excluded provides a good opportunity to reprise certain key points.  Not only was the excluded statement essentially “commentary” and “opinion” it also failed to…

MARMITE: SKELETON ARGUMENTS: "SO CALLED": ATTEMPTS TO APPEAL THE FACTS: A SPREAD OF ISSUES CONSIDERED

MARMITE: SKELETON ARGUMENTS: “SO CALLED”: ATTEMPTS TO APPEAL THE FACTS: A SPREAD OF ISSUES CONSIDERED

October 19, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Solicitors Regulation Authority v Day & Ors [2018] EWHC 2726 the Divisional Court rejected the SRA’s appeal against a decision of the Solicitors’ Disciplinary Tribunal. There are some interesting comments about the number of documents and the length of skeleton’s…

SOLICITORS AND EXPERT WITNESSES CAN GO TO JAIL: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE VASTLY CHANGED MEDICAL REPORT

SOLICITORS AND EXPERT WITNESSES CAN GO TO JAIL: WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE VASTLY CHANGED MEDICAL REPORT

October 12, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 2581 (QB) Mr Justice Garnham found a solicitor and a doctor in contempt of court.   The solicitor was imprisoned for 12 months, the doctor given a six month sentence,…

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 2 & 3 : RISKING IT ALL ON A RECOLLECTION OF A MEETING & THE WITNESS WHO GIVES A WHOLLY NEW ACCOUNT FROM THE WITNESS BOX

ADVISING YOUR CLIENT ON LITIGATION RISKS 2 & 3 : RISKING IT ALL ON A RECOLLECTION OF A MEETING & THE WITNESS WHO GIVES A WHOLLY NEW ACCOUNT FROM THE WITNESS BOX

September 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Slade (t/a Richard Slade And Co) v Abbhi [2018] EWHC 2039 (Comm) (24 September 2018) illustrates another risk of litigation.  The risk of a witness giving a wholly new account whilst giving evidence at trial. THE CASE The…

ADVISING ON LITIGATION RISKS 1: YOU CAN BE BELIEVED AS A WITNESS AND STILL LOSE YOUR CASE

ADVISING ON LITIGATION RISKS 1: YOU CAN BE BELIEVED AS A WITNESS AND STILL LOSE YOUR CASE

September 17, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Risks of litigation, Witness statements

Earlier posts have looked at the concept of “litigation risks”. This is something we are all aware of as practising lawyers. We advise on those risks on a daily basis.  However very little is written about this.  This is the…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 13: WHAT IS MEANT BY WITNESS "CREDIBILITY"? WHY THIS IS OFTEN CENTRAL TO A LITIGATOR'S WORK

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 13: WHAT IS MEANT BY WITNESS “CREDIBILITY”? WHY THIS IS OFTEN CENTRAL TO A LITIGATOR’S WORK

September 4, 2018 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Many  civil cases  turn on  witness credibility, yet very little training and education is given to lawyers about assessing credibility.  Every litigator has to be able to make an assessment of this  when taking a case on; before issuing proceedings…

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE IS A CONTEXTUAL EVALUATION FOR THE JUDGE: MEDICAL RECORDS ARE NOT DEFINITIVE

APPEALING FINDINGS OF FACT: THE WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE IS A CONTEXTUAL EVALUATION FOR THE JUDGE: MEDICAL RECORDS ARE NOT DEFINITIVE

August 30, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Written advocacy

We are looking, for the second time, at the Court of Appeal decision yesterday in Manzi -v- King’s College NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 1882. That part of the judgment that deals with findings of fact  at trial and appeals against…

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,…

PROVING THINGS 122: THE CLAIMANT MAY NOT BE DISHONEST BUT SHE IS NOT ACCURATE:  A HIGH IQ IS NO GUARANTEE OF COMMONSENSE

PROVING THINGS 122: THE CLAIMANT MAY NOT BE DISHONEST BUT SHE IS NOT ACCURATE: A HIGH IQ IS NO GUARANTEE OF COMMONSENSE

August 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content

Many cases rest on the credibility of witnesses.  A detailed examination can be found in the judgment of HH Judge Saggerson (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Hibberd-Little v Carlton [2018] EWHC 1787 (QB). There are issues here in relation…

THE KIMATHI DECISION 3: THE EVIDENCE GATHERING PROCESS, STANDARD QUESTIONNAIRES AND THE USE OF LEADING QUESTIONS

THE KIMATHI DECISION 3: THE EVIDENCE GATHERING PROCESS, STANDARD QUESTIONNAIRES AND THE USE OF LEADING QUESTIONS

August 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the third  in the series that looks at the decision in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 2066 (QB).  Here we look at the evidence gathering process, in particular the use of questionnaires and the…

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, ACCURATE EVIDENCE AND A REMARKABLE CHANGE OF ACCOUNT BY THE CLAIMANT'S WITNESS

CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, ACCURATE EVIDENCE AND A REMARKABLE CHANGE OF ACCOUNT BY THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS

August 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in  Britchford v Staffordshire And Stoke-On-Trent Partnership NHS Trust [2018] EWHC 2109 (QB) is another example of a clinical negligence claim that rested on the accuracy of medical evidence.  A feature of the case is that the claimant did…

THE KIMATHI DECISION 2: TRANSLATORS ON TRIAL: ALSO A LOOK AT THE GUIDANCE ON TRANSLATING WITNESS STATEMENTS

THE KIMATHI DECISION 2: TRANSLATORS ON TRIAL: ALSO A LOOK AT THE GUIDANCE ON TRANSLATING WITNESS STATEMENTS

August 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

This is the second in the series that looks at the decision in Kimathi & Ors v The Foreign And Commonwealth Office [2018] EWHC 2066 (QB).  Here we look at issues relating to the translators.  It shows the way in which the…

CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMPARE AND CONTRAST: EDITING STATEMENTS CAN AFFECT CREDIBILITY

CHANGING WITNESS STATEMENTS: COMPARE AND CONTRAST: EDITING STATEMENTS CAN AFFECT CREDIBILITY

July 31, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment case of ML (A Child) v Guy’s And St Thomas’ National Healthcare Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 2010 has an interesting passage on witness statements. It is an example of how early witness statements that were not initially disclosed can…

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…

PROVING THINGS 116:  HONEST WITNESSES CAN BE WRONG: "INSIGNIFICANT EVENT" BECOMES "MAGNIFIED IN THE CLAIMANT'S MIND"

PROVING THINGS 116: HONEST WITNESSES CAN BE WRONG: “INSIGNIFICANT EVENT” BECOMES “MAGNIFIED IN THE CLAIMANT’S MIND”

June 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

The judgment in  Pauline Carter v Kingswood Learning And Leisure Group Limited [2018] EWHC 1616 (QB) shows a scenario where a claimant can be totally honest and credible, but still be wrong. “I am sure she is an honest person, but…

MORE ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE ICI CASE: WHEN EVIDENCE IS NOT ADMISSIBLE AND (WHEN IT IS) IT IS NOT RELIABLE

MORE ABOUT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE ICI CASE: WHEN EVIDENCE IS NOT ADMISSIBLE AND (WHEN IT IS) IT IS NOT RELIABLE

June 25, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

We are looking again at aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in  Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2018] EWHC 1577 (TCC).The previous post in this case looked at the “duplicate” witness statements of the defendant.  Here…

WHEN LESSONS ARE NOT LEARNT: "IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS" : COPY AND PASTE FUNCTION OF A WORD PROCESSOR WILL NOT IMPRESS A JUDGE

WHEN LESSONS ARE NOT LEARNT: “IDENTICAL WITNESS STATEMENTS” : COPY AND PASTE FUNCTION OF A WORD PROCESSOR WILL NOT IMPRESS A JUDGE

June 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

It is worth looking in more detail at the the judgment  of Mr Justice Fraser in  Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2018] EWHC 1577 (TCC).  In particular on witness statements.   The judgment sets out some important lessons (it…

DAMAGES CLAIMED BUT NOT PLEADED:  REALLY STRANGE WITNESS STATEMENTS; PARTISAN EXPERTS: THE ICI CASE IS BACK IN COURT

DAMAGES CLAIMED BUT NOT PLEADED: REALLY STRANGE WITNESS STATEMENTS; PARTISAN EXPERTS: THE ICI CASE IS BACK IN COURT

June 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

If you are ever looking for an example of matters going awry in litigation then read the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in  Imperial Chemical Industries Ltd v Merit Merrell Technology Ltd [2018] EWHC 1577 (TCC).  All the usual problematic issues…

PROVING THINGS 115: WHEN HANDWRITTEN NOTES OF MEETINGS VARY FROM THE TYPED VERSION (AND THERE IS MORE...)

PROVING THINGS 115: WHEN HANDWRITTEN NOTES OF MEETINGS VARY FROM THE TYPED VERSION (AND THERE IS MORE…)

June 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Access to justice, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

For the second time in recent weeks I am looking at how a judge assesses evidence in a family case.  Again this shows issues of general importance and relevance in the relation of those responsible for gathering evidence in the…

WITNESS DEMEANOUR: NOT THAT IMPORTANT (INDEED PROBABLY UNIMPORTANT): COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

WITNESS DEMEANOUR: NOT THAT IMPORTANT (INDEED PROBABLY UNIMPORTANT): COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

June 15, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to Laurie Anstis for drawing my attention to the decision of the Court of Appeal decision in SS (Sri Lanka), R (On the Application Of) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2018] EWCA Civ 1391….

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND COST BUDGETS: "THEY WILL HAVE BECOME AN ARTIFICIAL CONSTRUCT OF THE LAWYERS"

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND COST BUDGETS: “THEY WILL HAVE BECOME AN ARTIFICIAL CONSTRUCT OF THE LAWYERS”

May 28, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Costs budgeting, Members Content, Witness statements

There are some interesting observations in the judgment of Chief Master Marsh in Various Claimants v MGN Ltd [2018] EWHC 1244 (Ch).  The way in which a witness statement is likely to be drafted can be considered at the cost budget…

CLAIMANTS WERE NOT CREDIBLE: DEFENDANT'S APPEAL SUCCESSFUL: "THE DEFENDANT PRESENTED AN ANSWERABLE CASE THAT THE CLAIMANTS FAILED TO PROVE THEIR CASE"

CLAIMANTS WERE NOT CREDIBLE: DEFENDANT’S APPEAL SUCCESSFUL: “THE DEFENDANT PRESENTED AN ANSWERABLE CASE THAT THE CLAIMANTS FAILED TO PROVE THEIR CASE”

May 24, 2018 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Case Management, Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Schedules, Witness statements

In Richards & Anor v Morris [2018] EWHC 1289 (QB) the defendant was successful in appealing on the grounds that the trial judge should have made more robust findings from the lack of credibility on the part of the claimants.   There…

PROVING THINGS 100: IT IS DIFFICULT TO PROVE ANYTHING WHEN EVERYONE IS LYING: "A FESTIVAL OF MENDACITY"

PROVING THINGS 100: IT IS DIFFICULT TO PROVE ANYTHING WHEN EVERYONE IS LYING: “A FESTIVAL OF MENDACITY”

May 22, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment  of Mr Justice Turner today in  Rashid v Munir & Ors [2018] EWHC 1258 (QB) illustrates the difficult task of the trial judge when all of the witnesses are strangers to the truth. “Attempting to establish the common but…

EXPERTS AS ADVOCATES FOR THE CLAIMANTS' CAUSE: WITNESSES WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS VERY DIFFERENT TO THEIR WITNESS STATEMENTS

EXPERTS AS ADVOCATES FOR THE CLAIMANTS’ CAUSE: WITNESSES WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS VERY DIFFERENT TO THEIR WITNESS STATEMENTS

May 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

I am grateful to Dominic Regan for sending me a copy of the judgment  of Mrs Justice Andrews today in Gee -v- Depuy International Ltd [2018] EWHC 1208. The judgment is 762 paragraphs long and will be widely read by…

PROVING THINGS 97:  AN APPROACH THAT WAS UTTERLY FLAWED AND HOPELESSLY CARELESS: WHEN SOLICITORS LETTERS BECAME PART OF A PROCESS OF UNLAWFUL HARRASSMENT

PROVING THINGS 97: AN APPROACH THAT WAS UTTERLY FLAWED AND HOPELESSLY CARELESS: WHEN SOLICITORS LETTERS BECAME PART OF A PROCESS OF UNLAWFUL HARRASSMENT

May 20, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Worthington & Anor v Metropolitan Housing Trust Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 1125 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision that a housing association had unlawfully harassed its own tenants.  A major part of the problem came from the association’s highly…

PROVING THINGS 96: A WITNESS MAY NOT BE TELLING LIES - BUT THEIR MEMORY MAY WELL BE BIASED:  ASSESSING EVIDENCE WHEN FRIENDS FALL OUT

PROVING THINGS 96: A WITNESS MAY NOT BE TELLING LIES – BUT THEIR MEMORY MAY WELL BE BIASED: ASSESSING EVIDENCE WHEN FRIENDS FALL OUT

May 18, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

One of the hardest tasks of litigation is trying to assess the credibility of a witness, particularly your own witness.  Litigants can (and often do) have strong views about the case and what they said and did.   The fact that…

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 8: LEAVING VENOM OUT OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PEN DIPPED IN VITRIOL IS GOING TO COST YOU MONEY

CIVIL PROCEDURE: BACK TO BASICS 8: LEAVING VENOM OUT OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PEN DIPPED IN VITRIOL IS GOING TO COST YOU MONEY

May 16, 2018 · by gexall · in Applications, Members Content, Witness statements

It is surprising how many witness statements I have read (both in practice and in the reports) that contain invective material.  Litigants appear to think it important, and effective, that they disparage their opponents.  Litigants should be warned that this…

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 3: A JUDGMENT FROM TODAY: CREDIBILITY A CENTRAL PART OF THE CASE

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 3: A JUDGMENT FROM TODAY: CREDIBILITY A CENTRAL PART OF THE CASE

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

This is the third post today about the subject of the assessment of witness credibility. By a curious piece of good planning it comes from a judgment today in  Jiangsu Shagang Group Co Ltd v Loki Owning Company Ltd [2018] EWHC…

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 EVIDENCE AND DOCUMENTS: GESTMIN CONSIDERED IN THE SUPREME COURT

February 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Bancoult, R (on the application of) (No 3) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Respondent)[2018] UKSC 3 the Supreme Court considered the “Gestmin” principles.  There are several aspectse of the judgment. Here we look at the judgment…

WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREATING AN ACCURATE RECORD OF INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT AT WORK: SPOT - AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT

WITNESS EVIDENCE: CREATING AN ACCURATE RECORD OF INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT AT WORK: SPOT – AN IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT

February 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

I have written before about the book The Memory Illusion. In essence  lawyers need to be concerned about how easy it is for false memories to be created and how fallible the human memory is. The creation of an inaccurate…

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON'T COMPLY WITH THE RULES:  10 REASONS WHY THE GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT: LITIGATION REQUIRES EVIDENCE NOT GOSSIP

WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT DON’T COMPLY WITH THE RULES: 10 REASONS WHY THE GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT: LITIGATION REQUIRES EVIDENCE NOT GOSSIP

January 27, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a brief report on Lawtel that highlights the need for compliance with the rules relating to witness statements. The issue of failing to give sources of information and belief has been dealt with several times on this blog….

THE ADVANTAGES OF GETTING WITNESS EVIDENCE EARLY - AND GETTING IT RIGHT:   REDUCING THE RISKS OF LITIGATION

THE ADVANTAGES OF GETTING WITNESS EVIDENCE EARLY – AND GETTING IT RIGHT: REDUCING THE RISKS OF LITIGATION

January 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

 It is worthwhile repeating, and thinking about one part of  the judgment of Master Leonard Douglas v Ministry of Justice & Anor [2018] EWHC B2 (Costs). “… the cost of preparing witness evidence will normally be recoverable as part of the cost…

HAS THE WITNESS FOR THE OTHER SIDE WRITTEN A BOOK? THAT IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION: RESEARCHING AN EXPERT BEFORE THEY GIVE EVIDENCE

HAS THE WITNESS FOR THE OTHER SIDE WRITTEN A BOOK? THAT IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION: RESEARCHING AN EXPERT BEFORE THEY GIVE EVIDENCE

January 8, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

I have lost track of the number of interlocutory judgments there have been in the case of  Kimathi & Ors v Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The latest judgment being at [2017] EWHC 3054 (QB). This  judgment deals with the issue…

THE CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES: WHEN THE DEFENDANT'S OWN EVIDENCE AMOUNTS TO A HOME GOAL

THE CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES: WHEN THE DEFENDANT’S OWN EVIDENCE AMOUNTS TO A HOME GOAL

January 7, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked many times at the issue of witness credibility and why the judge prefers the evidence of one witness over another . This was an issue to the fore in the judgment of Mr Justice Green in  Khakshouri…

"SOMETIMES AN UNIMPRESSIVE WITNESS SPEAKS THE TRUTH": FACT FINDING AND THE CIVIL COURTS: PRIVY COUNCIL OVERTURN FINDINGS OF FACT

“SOMETIMES AN UNIMPRESSIVE WITNESS SPEAKS THE TRUTH”: FACT FINDING AND THE CIVIL COURTS: PRIVY COUNCIL OVERTURN FINDINGS OF FACT

January 5, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Cleare v The Attorney General & Ors (Bahamas) [2017] UKPC 38 the Privy Council was scathing of the method of fact finding of the trial judge. The judge erred in failing to consider the significance of medical evidence. ” It…

COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL  - IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD

COUNTY COURT HAS POWER TO SET ASIDE A JUDGMENT AFTER TRIAL – IF IT WAS OBTAINED BY FRAUD

December 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Setting aside judgment, Witness statements

The decision in Salekipour & Anor v Parmar [2017] EWCA Civ 2141 was made after three previous hearings a (including two appeal hearings) in the lower courts.  It was the only time the claimants were successful.  It involved an important procedural…

WITNESSES WHO ARGUE THE CASE AND EXPERTS WHO ACT AS ADVOCATES: THIS IS NOT GOING TO HELP ...

WITNESSES WHO ARGUE THE CASE AND EXPERTS WHO ACT AS ADVOCATES: THIS IS NOT GOING TO HELP …

December 10, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

In  British Telecommunications Plc v Office Of Communications [2017] CAT 25 the Competition Appeal Tribunal commented on two of the central evidential issues of much commercial litigation: witnesses who give much commentary and “argue” the case; experts who act as advocates. …

PROVING THINGS 79: SOME THINGS JUST CAN'T BE A COINCIDENCE: A CAR CRASH OF A CASE

PROVING THINGS 79: SOME THINGS JUST CAN’T BE A COINCIDENCE: A CAR CRASH OF A CASE

December 7, 2017 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Members Content, Witness statements

We have already looked today at the judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Yavuz & Ors[2017] EWHC 3088 (QB). However that judgment also contains a close and careful analysis of witness evidence. “I start by asking myself this question:…

HOW MANY LITIGANTS HAVE REGRETTED STARTING THE CASE? POISE AND POLISH IS NEVER ENOUGH IN A COURT ROOM

HOW MANY LITIGANTS HAVE REGRETTED STARTING THE CASE? POISE AND POLISH IS NEVER ENOUGH IN A COURT ROOM

November 25, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This one paragraph from a judgement yesterday gives pause for thought. “The Claimant observed somewhat wistfully towards the conclusion of the trial that had he anticipated what was entailed, he would not have brought this claim in the first place….

WITNESS CREDIBILITY, VERY BAD SINGING AND A MOVIE: ALL HUMAN LIFE IS HERE: (SOMETHING FOR LAWYERS TOO...)

WITNESS CREDIBILITY, VERY BAD SINGING AND A MOVIE: ALL HUMAN LIFE IS HERE: (SOMETHING FOR LAWYERS TOO…)

November 22, 2017 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The decision in Martin & Anor v Kogan & Ors [2017] EWHC 2927 (IPEC) centred on witness credibility. Not so much honesty but accuracy of recollection. It illustrates the issue of how the judge goes about assessing evidence when witnesses…

APPEALS ON FACTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: DAMNED IF THE WITNESSES AGREE: DAMNED IF THEY DON'T

APPEALS ON FACTS AND WITNESS EVIDENCE: DAMNED IF THE WITNESSES AGREE: DAMNED IF THEY DON’T

November 18, 2017 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Shittu v The Home Office [2017] EWCA Civ 1748 contains some interesting observations about attempts to appeal on findings of fact, “judgecraft” and fact-finding generally.   “The case followed the pattern of many…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 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

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • 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…)

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.