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 evidence » Page 13

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: NOW THERE REALLY IS ONE LAW FOR THE RICH: THE PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS FOR CLAIMANT LAWYERS

May 13, 2015 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There has been much debate about the impact of the “fundamental dishonesty” law.  One practical effect it must have, however, is to ensure that claimant lawyers consider and explain the importance of the witness statement. THE ISSUE The problem with…

APPEALING ON THE JUDGE'S FINDINGS OF FACTS: A TRIAL IS NOT A DRESS REHEARSAL BUT "THE FIRST AND LAST NIGHT OF THE SHOW"

May 12, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

In the decision in Watson Farley and Williams -v- Ostrovizky today [2015] EWCA Civ 457 the Court of Appeal emphasised the difficulties of a party appealing findings of facts by the trial judge. “The aptness of the metaphor relating to…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY AND APPEALS: A COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

May 4, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Curran -v- Collins [2015] EWCA Civ 404 the Court of Appeal considered how an appellate court should approach issues of witness credibility.  It is an example of a court dealing with a witness who, the judge finds, has “convinced…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AVOIDING JAIL: ARE YOU PROTECTING YOUR CLIENTS AND PROTECTING YOURSELF?

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND AVOIDING JAIL: ARE YOU PROTECTING YOUR CLIENTS AND PROTECTING YOURSELF?

April 19, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In the recent case of Hughmans -v- Dunhill [2015] EWHC 716 (Ch) an interesting point arose about the drafting of a witness statement when a (former) client alleged that it had largely been drafted by her (former) solicitor. The assertion…

ITS NOT WHAT THE JUDGE SAID BUT THE WAY THAT THEY SAID IT: DISCUSSIONS FROM DOWN UNDER

March 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Supreme Court of South Australia made some interesting observations about the interaction between the bench and the bar in Stone -v- Moore [2015] SASC 46 (24th March 2015). In particular what does the appellate court do when a complaint…

FOOTBALL, SEX, INJUNCTIONS AND MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE: BE CAREFUL NOT TO GET ON THE JUDGE'S OFFSIDE

March 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

In YXB -v- TNO Mr Justice Warby set out the importance of full and frank disclosure on parties making an application for an ex-parte injunction.  It also reiterates the importance of claimants giving direct evidence whenever possible and the dangers…

SOLICITOR FOUND TO HAVE DELIBERATELY MISLED THE COURT: BOREH -v- DJIBOUTI

March 23, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content

In Boreh -v- Republic of Djibouti [2015] EWHC 769 (Comm) Mr Justice Flaux made a clear and unequivocal finding that a solicitor had deliberately misled the court. This led to the setting aside of the injunction that the clients had…

ASSESSING THE EVIDENCE ON A SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION: CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE RAW MATERIAL IS NECESSARY

March 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Calland -v- Financial Conduct Authority [2015] EWCA Civ 192 the Court of Appeal set out important principles to be considered when the court is considering an application for summary judgment. THE CASE The claimant brought an action under the…

PUTTING "WITHOUT PREJUDICE" ON LETTERS DOES NOT NECESSARILY MAKE THEM PRIVILEGED: AVONWICK -V- WEBINVEST IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

January 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Disclosure, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Avonwick -v- Webinvest has been looked at before on this blog. Mr Justice David Richards held that letters asking for time to pay a debt were not covered by privilege just because they were headed “without prejudice”….

THE MITCHELL JUDGMENT 2: THE ROLE OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

December 2, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in the substantive Mitchell case has been examined several times on this blog. Not in relation to political and other ramifications but instead considering the judge’s analysis of the evidence.  The previous post looked at the difficulties posed…

SOME THINGS MAY BE BETTER MEDIATED THAN LITIGATED: NEIGHBOUR DISPUTES FOR INSTANCE

October 9, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Mediation & ADR, Members Content

There are some very important observations in the judgment  of Norris J in the case of Bradley -v- Heslin [2014] EWHC 3276 (Ch) today.  This was given in a  neighbour dispute over access and gates which could have been remedied…

← Previous 1 … 12 13

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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP – BUT HINDER: “I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT’S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: THE DANGERS OF LETTING WITNESSES GIVE “OPINION” EVIDENCE: TWELVE YEARS ON AND THINGS MAY HAVE NOT CHANGED THAT MUCH: APRIL 2014
  • PROVING THINGS 287: CLAIMS FOR FUTURE LOSS OF EARNINGS OF A CHILD: A JUDGMENT FROM YESTERDAY (AND A WEBINAR NEXT MONDAY…)
  • “OVERHEATED LANGUAGE” A “CAVALIER APPROACH” AND “THIN ALLEGATIONS”: WHY IT PAYS TO BE CAREFUL AND DETAILED WHEN MAKING APPLICATIONS TO DISCHARGE INJUNCTIONS

Top Posts

  • CHILD CLAIMANTS AND LOSS OF EARNINGS CLAIMS: WEBINAR 20th APRIL 2026: NOW WITH GREATLY EXPANDED QUESTIONNAIRE
  • AN APPEAL WAS LODGED IN TIME: SOMETIMES THE COURT DOES NOT HELP - BUT HINDER: "I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT THE COURT THWARTED THE LITIGANT'S PROPER AND REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO BRING THE APPEAL IN TIME"
  • MAZUR MATTERS 61: A COMPARISON OF THE LAW SOCIETY GUIDANCE BEFORE AND AFTER THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION
  • THE GUIDELINE HOURLY RATES: SEE THEM HERE: UPDATED FOR 2026 RATES
  • GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT

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.