WITNESSES AT SEA: EVIDENCE FROM THE HIGH SEAS
The judgment of Mr Justice Teare (sitting with two assessors) in Sakizaya Kalon, Owners of The Vessel v Panamax Alexander, Owners of The Vessel [2020] EWHC 2604 (Admlty) shows some real advantages of being able to take witness evidence remotely. …
WITNESS EVIDENCE AND COUNTER-SCHEDULE STRUCK OUT AS INADMISSIBLE: THE PRINCIPLES APPLIED
In Rahman v Rahman & Ors [2020] EWHC 2392 (Ch) Master Clark struck out part of the defendants’ witness evidence and counter-schedule. The judgment provides a useful summary of when the court will strike out evidence and statements of case….
“LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”: A REMINDER OF ITS IMPORTANCE
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…
WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS? A REVIEW OF THE CASES
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
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
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
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…
OPINION EVIDENCE AND DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED AT TRIAL
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”
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
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)
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…
![JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: "ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN"](https://i0.wp.com/www.civillitigationbrief.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/calculator_count_statistics_1277492.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: “ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN”
Last week the “Covid Repeats” posts on this blog highlighted a few (and just a few) of the cases where judges had been critical of the role of experts, or experts involved in cases has been problematic. That this remains…
WITNESS STATEMENTS FULL OF VITRIOL – THIS IS NEVER GOING TO END WELL…
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…
PRE-ACTION DISCLOSURE: CONDUCT, DISCRETION AND THE “FISHING EXPEDITION” ANALOGY MAY NOT BE A GOOD ONE
It is relatively rare for there to be a High Court judgment on the issue of pre-action disclosure. In Taylor Wimpey UK Ltd v Harron Homes Ltd [2020] EWHC 1190 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser had some interesting observations on the…
THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS HAVE “FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS”: BACK TO BASICS FROM MR JUSTICE WAKSMAN
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 2: DEADLINES AND PROCRASTINATION: HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH IT?
Working in unusual conditions, often away from the office, and in the midst of a pandemic can sharpen the mind. For many of us, however, it makes work more difficult. It is worthwhile repeating a post from last year with…
GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: NOT A MERE TECHNICALITY: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES CAN HAVE MAJOR CONSEQUENCES
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…
DEFENDANT’S PART 20 CLAIM AGAINST CLAIMANT’S WITNESSES STRUCK OUT: WITNESSES HAVE IMMUNITY (AND THIS HAS CONSEQUENCES…)
I am grateful to barrister David Green for supplying me with a note* of the judgment of HHJ Saggerson in Holley -v- Woodburn. HHJ Saggerson, Central London County Court). A copy of the judgment is available here C65YX969 Holley v…
PROVING THINGS 175: WHEN THE TRIAL JUDGE IS ASKED TO CONSIDER THE QUALITY OF CUDDLY TOYS IN COURT: CPR 33.6 AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE
There is an interesting reminder of the provisions of CPR 33.6 in the judgment of HHJ Russen QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Dowman Imports Ltd v 2 Toobz Ltd (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 291 (Comm). The judge…
APPLICATIONS TO THE COURT AND THE DUTY OF CANDOUR: THE JUDGE MUST SEE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE ADVERSE TO YOUR CASE
In Short & Ors, R (On the Application Of) v Police Misconduct Tribunal & Anor [2020] EWHC 385 (Admin) Mr Justice Saini issued a warning about the duty of candour owed to the court, particularly on a without notice application….