LAWYERS, LITIGATION & MEMORY II: HOW YOU ARE AFFECTING THE MEMORY OF WITNESSES (AND POSSIBLY SOWING THE SEEDS FOR DEFEAT)
The post on “Lawyers, litigation and memory”clearly struck a chord. It had many hundreds of readers (on a Sunday too). It highlights the fact that a failure to be trained in, and consider, issues relating to memory, causes litigators numerous…
IF YOU ARE BELIEVED YOU WILL WIN: THE NEED FOR A DEVIL'S ADVOCATE IN CIVIL LITIGATION
The post written yesterday on litigators and memory has already given rise to a large number of responses, particularly on Twitter. It is worthwhile taking the matter further by considering how and when a litigator should take stock of the quality…
LAWYERS, LITIGATION & MEMORY: THE MEMORY ILLUSION
A single moment of logical thought will lead to the conclusion that it is strange that lawyers don’t learn about memory. Much (indeed most) litigation relies on the memory of the parties. Judges are, more often than not, called upon…
TAKING WITNESS STATEMENTS AND FACT FINDING: VEHEMENT CRITICISM (OF A SURPRISING SOURCE)
The need to take care when drafting witness statements has been a regular theme of this blog. The delegating of witness statements to a party or client is an extremely dangerous (and foolish) practice. I have also examined, regularly,…
PROVING THINGS 44: FINDINGS OF FACT, WALTER MITTY AND WITNESS TRAINING
The judgment today of Mr Justice Coulson in Harlequin Property (SVG) Limited -v- Wilkins Kennedy [2016] 3188 EWHC (TCC) shows the importance of the judge’s assessment of witnesses. The judge made a clear and robust assessment of the witness evidence,…
PROVING THINGS 43: HOW THE COURT DECIDES: A PRIMER
The judgment of Master Matthews in Adepoju -v- Akinola [2016] EWHC 3160 (Ch) includes a useful primer on how the court goes about the task of deciding civil cases. “…the decision of the court is not necessarily the objective truth…
PROVING THINGS 42: SILENCE DOES NOT PROVE INDUCEMENT
We are returning to the case of Francis -v- Knapper [2016] EWHC 3093 (QB). That case has been looked at in relation to a failure to prove damages. However the claimants also had major evidential problems in proving misrepresentation. KEY POINTS…
WHY ALL LAWYERS HAVE TO KNOW ABOUT THE FALLIBILITY OF MEMORY (EVEN COMPANY LAWYERS)
I have written about the Gestmin principles many times on this blog. The importance of every litigator knowing about the fallibility of memory, and the way in which a trial judge is likely to approach these issues, is shown in the judgment…
PROVING THINGS 36: CREDIBILITY & CONTEMPORANEOUS DOCUMENTS: WORKING WITH CHILDREN AND ANIMALS
One of my colleagues tweeted that the judgment in Harris -v-Miller [2016] EWHC 2438 (QB) was “short on the law and long on the facts”. This is a correct assessment. The case shows just how important the facts are in…
WITNESS CREDIBILITY, DELAY AND DENTON.
There is an interesting discussion of the credibility of witnesses in the judgment of Mr Registrar Briggs in Preston -v- Green (Liquidator of Cre8atsea Limited) [2016] EWHC 25222 (Ch). The Registrar also had to consider whether to exercise his discretion…
"DID NOT PRETEND TO UNDERSTAND THINGS ATTRIBUTED TO HER IN HER WITNESS STATEMENT…"
There are several high profile cases in which judges have expressed scepticism (sometimes profound scepticism) about whether a witness statement really reflects the knowledge of a witness. A short, but telling, passage in the judgment of Mr Justice Mitting in…
EVIDENCE, RETAINERS, ATTENDANCE NOTES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY
There have been a number of recent cases where disgruntled clients have attempted to sue their lawyers. The judgments highlight the difficulties for trial judges who have to assess evidence after some lapse of time. They also highlight the importance…
PROVING THINGS 35: RECONSTRUCTION, DOCUMENTS AND MEMORY
Most law reports will look at the findings of law made in a judgment. In this blog we are interested in findings of fact and the way in which a judge goes about making those findings. A good example can…
PROVING THINGS 34 : THERE IS NO PRIMER FOR SCUTTLERS: WHEN YOUR SHIP DOESN'T COME IN
We have looked at many different types of case during this series. However this is the first time we have looked at an Admiralty case and at case about the “scuttling” of a ship. The judgment of Mr Justice…
THE MALLEABLE WITNESS: ANOTHER EXAMPLE WHERE LAWYERS WERE BLAMED FOR INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS
We have looked before at cases where witnesses point to their lawyers when discrepancies appear in their witness statements. This can occur in every type of case as can be seen by the judgment of Mr Justice Edwards-Stuart in Fluor…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW VII: WITNESS STATEMENTS – SHORT AND SWEET IS BEST
We have already looked once this week at a judge’s viewpoint on the drafting of witness statements. In terms of advocacy they are crucial. The rules only allow the witness to give additional evidence in exceptional circumstances. Many cases that…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, THE WEATHER AND THE DISTRICT JUDGE…
The observations by District Judge Etherington reported by John Hyde in the Law Society Gazette deserve repetition and the widest audience possible. (The Readers’ comments on the article also make for interesting reading). THE GAZETTE REPORT The District Judge was speaking…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN THINGS GO WRONG – BLAME THE SOLICITOR
This blog has noted before that a witness whose evidence is not accepted often attempts to renege on their witness statement and blame their solicitor for the errors. Another example can be found in the recent decision of Mr Recorder…
PROVING THINGS 31: WITNESSES TEND TO REMEMBER WHAT THEY WANT TO REMEMBER
How do judges decide whether a witness is accurate in their recollection? This issue has been a common theme on this blog. This was an issue considered by Mark Cawson QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in The Connaught…
THE INFERENCES TO BE DRAWN FROM ABSENT WITNESSES: EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT OVERRIDES HEARSAY
This blog has looked many times at cases which consider the practical implication of the test in Central Manchester Health Authority v W (A minor) [1998] PIQR P324: the inferences a trial judge should infer when witnesses are noted called at…
ADVOCACY THE JUDGE’S VIEW VI: HOW A JUDGE ASSESSES WITNESS EVIDENCE
We have covered many countries so far in this series which looks at the advice that judges give on advocacy. For the next few posts I have decided to stay closer to home. I want to look at the…
PROVING THINGS 30: OFFICE GOSSIP PROVES NOTHING: THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
There is a requirement, a mandatory requirement, that a witness making a witness statement gives the source of their information and belief. This requirement is often ignored, or there is some vague and general wording of knowledge. Ignoring, and respecting,…
WITNESS STATEMENTS THAT ARE LARGELY DISREGARDED: A CASE IN POINT
Witness statements are often too long, contain inadmissible evidence and tendentious comments. An example can be see in the judgment in Moore -v- Moore [2016] EWHC 2202 (Ch) Mr S Monty QC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the Chancery…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: WHEN CAN A LAY WITNESS GIVE OPINION EVIDENCE?THE STATUTE, THE CASES & SOME GUIDANCE
I have written, many times, about the dangers of putting opinion evidence into witness statements. The attempts of witnesses to be experts, or to tell the judge what the outcome of the case should be, can lead to robust adverse…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE LAWYER'S DUTIES: A FAMILY CASE
There are some observations in the judgment in Hampshire County Council -v- O [2016] EW B22 (CC) that are of general importance. It relates to the duty of lawyers to ensure that witness statements are full and adequate. “It is…
I'VE LOST £5 MILLION AND ITS ALL MY SOLICITOR'S FAULT: WHEN THE CLIENT BLAMES YOU FOR THEIR OWN BAD DECISIONS
This post is unusual in that it deals with a case from a different jurisdiction (Northern Ireland) and a professional negligence action against a conveyancer not a litigator. However the decision of Deeny J in Eden (NI) Limited -v- Mills,…
BANQUO’S GHOST NOT AT THE FEAST: WHEN A KEY WITNESS IS NOT CALLED – THE INFERENCES A COURT WILL DRAW
There is an interesting discussion of the role of the “absent witness” in the judgment today of Mr Justice Kerr in O’Hare -v-Coutts & Co [2016] EWHC 2224 (QB). There are dangers in a party not calling someone who is…
YOU ARE PAYING YOUR WITNESSES BY RESULTS: WE WANT TO STRIKE YOU OUT
The judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in EnergySolutions EU Limited -v- Nuclear Decommissioning Authority [2016] EWHC 1988 (TCC) is a highly technical analysis of procurement legislation in an action that had already had a somewhat tortuous procedural history. However I…
YOUR WITNESSES ARE LINED UP ALL IN A ROW: THEN YOU MAY BE IN TROUBLE
Many cases have many witnesses saying, essentially, the same thing. Inconsistencies between witnesses are (often subconsciously) ironed out by lawyers during the statement stage. However consistency is not always a good thing. WHEN WITNESSES AGREE 100%: THEY’RE PROBABLY WRONG This…
LOOKING AT LITIGATION FROM THE LITIGANT'S VIEWPOINT 1: A BOOK WORTH READING
There is surprisingly little written about the actual experience of being a litigant, particularly a litigant in the civil courts. What is more the “experience”, or viewpoint of the client does not figure greatly (if at all) in legal training. Doctors have…
FRAUDULENT CLAIMANTS AND THE NEED FOR SELF-PROTECTION BY LAWYERS
A report in Litigation Futures last week illustrates the need for “self protection” by lawyers. The headline says it all “Insurance Fraudster who tried to blame his solicitor jailed for 18 months”. “IT WAS ALL MY SOLICITOR’S FAULT” The claimant…
RE-VISITING WHITEHOUSE -v- JORDAN 1: THESE APPEALS WERE NOT ABOUT CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AT ALL: IT’S ALL ABOUT THE FACTS
The decisions of the Court of Appeal and House of Lords in Whitehouse -v- Jordan are often put forward as seminal cases in the law of clinical negligence. However these appeals, in reality, were not about issues relating to clinical…
THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 4: DON'T MAKE ALLEGATIONS OF LYING IF YOU HAVEN'T PUT THEM TO THE WITNESS
The previous posts* on the Arroyo judgment have concentrated, for the most part, on the judge’s criticisms of the evidence of the claimant. However there is one short passage which illustrates an important principle of litigation – a party cannot…
PROVING THINGS 27: BURDENS OF PROOF, HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND…. ATTEMPTED MURDER
In Daley -v- Bakiyev [2016] EWHC 1972 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone dealt with issues relating to the burden of proof where there very serious allegations. The fact that a central witness for the claimant did not attend court, and his…
THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 3: WITNESSES AND CREDIBILITY
This is the third in the series of posts on the judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages; the second at the…
THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 2: EXPERTS, OH EXPERTS.
This is the second in the series of posts on the judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages. Here we look…
PROVING THINGS 26: DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN WHAT YOU CAN REMEMBER AND WHAT YOU NOW THINK YOU DID
There have been a large number of posts on this blog about witness evidence, in particular the way that the courts assess the accuracy of evidence. A surprising number of these have been in the context of clinical negligence claims….
PROVING THINGS 25: ATTEMPTS TO SMUGGLE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS DO NOT HELP (AND CARRY NO WEIGHT)
There are interesting observations in the judgment of His Honour Judge Hacon today in Raft Limited -v- Freestyle of Haven Limited [2016] EWHC 1711 (IPEC) in relation to an attempt to avoid a limit on the number of witnesses who…
THE HARB CASE: IT'S ALL ABOUT THE EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE MUST "SHOW THEIR WORKINGS"
The Court of Appeal judgment in Harb -v- HRR Prince Abdul Aziz Bin Fahd Bin Abdud Aziz [2016] EWCA Civ 556 has attracted a lot of attention because of the comments the Court made about the allegations of judicial bias….
MY WITNESS STATEMENT WAS DRAFTED BY MY LAWYER: THANK YOU OFFICER
There are 909 paragraphs in the judgment of Mr Justice Wyn Williams in Mouncher -v- The Chief Constable of South Wales Police [2016] EWHC 1367 (QB). I just want to look at one of them. This was a case all…
IT IS THE CLIENT THAT SHOULD GIVE THE EVIDENCE NOT THE SOLICITOR: ALSO VERY LATE DISCLOSURE
Why should a lawyer ever want to give evidence. What practical value does evidence given by a lawyer have when their clients could have been called? These were issues considered today by Master Marsh in his judgment in Pineport Limited…
WITNESS EVIDENCE, RELIABILITY AND CREDIBILITY: WHY EVERYONE SHOULD READ GESTMIN (OR FAILING THAT, MY SUMMARY)
I spent the afternoon lecturing to a group of enthusiastic lawyers about the importance of witness statements (and where things can, and do go wrong). I was worried that the enthusiasm could be waning waning when I took them, in…
ELEMENTARY EVIDENCE: THE COURTS DO NOT FOLLOW THE APPROACH OF SHERLOCK HOLMES
The judgment of Mrs Justice Carr DBE in Cooper -v-Thameside Company Ltd [2016] EWHC 1248 (TCC) contains an interesting, and ultimately important, consideration of the judicial approach to fact finding. It is interesting that this £6.5 million depended, primarily, on…
CIVIL EVIDENCE: IS EVIDENCE OBTAINED BY TORTURE ADMISSIBLE?
The question of whether evidence obtained by torture in civil proceedings is one I never envisaged having address. However it was an issue considered in the judgment of Mr Justice Knowles MBE In Shangang Shipping Company Ltd -v- HNA Group…
WITNESS STATEMENTS: ALTERATIONS AND THE FALLIBLE MEMORY: A SCIENTIFIC STUDY
It is worthwhile anyone involved in assessment of witness evidence reading the post by Julia Shaw in Scientific America today: Do you suffer from memory blindness. The post refers back to the altered witness statements in the Hillsborough enquiries in the…
WITNESS STATEMENTS & HILLSBOROUGH 3: CONFIRMATION BIAS AT ITS WORST
Much has been written and broadcast about Hillsborough. I am here concentrating on one small part of the process: the initial gathering of evidence. It was the flawed nature of this process that led to problems for the next two…
HILLSBOROUGH AND WITNESS STATEMENTS 2: THE EARLY MIXING OF FACT AND OPINION
The previous post in this series looked at the issues that arose when the solicitors for the police force sent out a missive asking the police officers on the ground for their “comment and impression”. There was an immediate mixing…
COURT OF APPEAL OVERTURNS FINDINGS OF FACT BY THE TRIAL JUDGE
In Elliston -v- Glencore Services (UK) Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 407 the Court of Appeal took the unusual step of overturning findings of fact by the trial judge. (It is perhaps important that I emphasise how rare this is. There…
HILLSBOROUGH AND WITNESS STATEMENTS 1: THE INITIAL PROCESS AND SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS
Hopefully we will never have another Hillsborough. It is possible (even probable) that there will be circumstances in which lawyers are involved in the large scale collection of evidence. The recent inquest has put the evidence gathering that took…
A BASIC THING THAT ANYONE PREPARING A WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD KNOW: THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FACTS AND OPINION
This blog has often observed that many litigators could make life a lot simpler if lay witnesses statements stopped trying to give expert evidence and expert witnesses stopped trying to determine issues of fact. I am grateful to Jeff…
You must be logged in to post a comment.