PROVING THINGS 185: SAYING "I'M BROKE" DOES NOT PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: "THE DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO KNOW THE CASE THEY HAVE TO MEET"

PROVING THINGS 185: SAYING “I’M BROKE” DOES NOT PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: “THE DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO KNOW THE CASE THEY HAVE TO MEET”

November 5, 2020 · by · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

We are returning again to the Court of Appeal decision in Diriye v Bojaj & Anor [2020] EWCA Civ 1400. This time concentrating upon the Court’s comments in relation to the need to prove impecuniosity and the claimant’s failure to…

"LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING": A REMINDER OF ITS IMPORTANCE

“LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”: A REMINDER OF ITS IMPORTANCE

September 7, 2020 · by · 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…

PROVING THINGS 84: THE NEED TO PROVE A LOSS IS A PRESSING ONE: THAT OLD FASHIONED NEED TO PROVE DAMAGES: BUSINESS INTERRUPTION CLAIM REJECTED

PROVING THINGS 84: THE NEED TO PROVE A LOSS IS A PRESSING ONE: THAT OLD FASHIONED NEED TO PROVE DAMAGES: BUSINESS INTERRUPTION CLAIM REJECTED

January 23, 2018 · by · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Witness statements

In Contact (Print And Packaging) Ltd v Travelers Insurance Co Ltd [2018] EWHC 83 (TCC) His Honour Judge Stephen Davies (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered (and rejected) a claimant’s claim for damages for interruption to its business. It is…