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 6
PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE

PROVING THINGS 250: FAILING TO PROVE IMPECUNIOSITY: A BARE ASSERTION IS NOT ADEQUATE

March 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content

The judgment  of Lord Justice Underhill (refusing permission to appeal) in Credico Marketing Ltd & Anor v Lambert & Anor [2023] EWCA Civ 262 relates a party who failed to adduce sufficient evidence to show impecuniosity. “No evidence of Mr…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A DEFENCE TO A CLAIM "BASED AT LEAST IN PART ON WISHFUL THINKING"

WITNESS STATEMENTS: NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE RULES AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A DEFENCE TO A CLAIM “BASED AT LEAST IN PART ON WISHFUL THINKING”

March 8, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Litkraft Ltd v Cottrell [2023] EWHC 465 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered issues relating to credibility and weight in a case where there had been non-compliance with the rules relating to witness statements.  We…

"THE FOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE THE CAREFUL WORK OF A LEGAL TEAM": JUDGE CRITICAL OF THE WAY STATEMENTS WERE PREPARED FOR TRIAL

“THE FOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE THE CAREFUL WORK OF A LEGAL TEAM”: JUDGE CRITICAL OF THE WAY STATEMENTS WERE PREPARED FOR TRIAL

February 17, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are many aspects of the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Mackenzie v Rosenblatt Solicitors & Anor [2023] EWHC 331 (Ch) that are of interest to litigators. However here we look at the judge’s criticisms of the witness statements…

"HYPERBOLIC COMMENT" NOT WELCOME IN LITIGATION: HIGH COURT JUDGE SENDS OUT A WARNING: PLANE LANGUAGE IS BEST...

“HYPERBOLIC COMMENT” NOT WELCOME IN LITIGATION: HIGH COURT JUDGE SENDS OUT A WARNING: PLANE LANGUAGE IS BEST…

January 19, 2023 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

In Peregrine Aviation Bravo Ltd & Ors v Laudamotion GmbH & Anor [2023] EWHC 48 (Comm) Mr Justice Henshaw was critical of “hyperbolic comment” in relation to the witness evidence.  This is not the first time that a judge has…

PROVING THINGS 246: WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE MATCHES NEITHER THE PLEADINGS NOR THE CONTEMPORARY RECORDS

PROVING THINGS 246: WHEN THE WITNESS EVIDENCE MATCHES NEITHER THE PLEADINGS NOR THE CONTEMPORARY RECORDS

January 18, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Statements of Truth, Witness statements

We are looking again at the judgment in Excalibur & Keswick Groundworks Ltd v McDonald [2023] EWCA Civ 18 from a slightly different stance. The appeal was about QOCS and setting aside a notice of discontinuance. However the process that led…

WITNESS DEMEANOUR:  ARGUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

WITNESS DEMEANOUR: ARGUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL

May 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

Occasionally I will use Twitter to tweet links to previous posts on this blog which may continue to be of interest.  I did this recently in relation to a post on witness credibility and demeanour that I wrote in 2018….

PROVING THINGS 233: ASSESSING EVIDENCE AFTER 14 YEARS: THE CRUEL CONCEPT OF CAUSATION IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

PROVING THINGS 233: ASSESSING EVIDENCE AFTER 14 YEARS: THE CRUEL CONCEPT OF CAUSATION IN MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE

May 19, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked many times at issues relating to witness evidence and the judicial approach when hearing evidence of matters that happened a considerable time before trial.  The difficulties are made clear in the judgment of HHJ Emma Kelly…

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER STRIKING OUT AN ACTION: A CASE WITH "A NUMBER OF EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES", NOT LEAST THAT THE DEFENDANT'S EVIDENCE WAS UNRELIABLE

COURT OF APPEAL ALLOW APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER STRIKING OUT AN ACTION: A CASE WITH “A NUMBER OF EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES”, NOT LEAST THAT THE DEFENDANT’S EVIDENCE WAS UNRELIABLE

May 5, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In  Storey v British Telecommunications Plc [2022] EWCA Civ 616 the Court of Appeal allowed an appeal against an order striking out an personal injury action.  The court was fairly critical about the evidence that had been placed before it…

A WITNESS GIVING EVIDENCE WHILST DRIVING A CAR: THEN FROM A CROWDED OFFICE AND THEN WITHOUT MOST OF THE DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: THIS DOES NOT END WELL

A WITNESS GIVING EVIDENCE WHILST DRIVING A CAR: THEN FROM A CROWDED OFFICE AND THEN WITHOUT MOST OF THE DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE: THIS DOES NOT END WELL

February 24, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Remote hearings

There are passages in the judgment of Recorder Douglas Campbell QC in  ASR Interiors Ltd v AWS Trading Ltd & Anor [2022] EWHC 372 (IPEC) which demonstrate a remarkably “relaxed” attitude to giving evidence in court by one of the…

PROVING THINGS 224: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE IMPORTANCE (& LIMITATIONS) OF THE CLAIMANT'S OWN EVIDENCE

PROVING THINGS 224: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS: THE IMPORTANCE (& LIMITATIONS) OF THE CLAIMANT’S OWN EVIDENCE

January 26, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

The impairment of someone’s ability to earn their living is always a serious matter.  There are a number of approaches that the court can take to the award of damages.   Anyone representing a claimant should read McRae -v- Chase International…

FAILING TO TAKE STEPS IN RELATION TO A VULNERABLE WITNESS RENDERED THE TRIAL UNFAIR: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

January 19, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content

In S (Vulnerable Party: Fairness Of Proceedings) [2022] EWCA Civ 8 the Court of Appeal set aside a judgment when the court had not appreciated that a key witness was a vulnerable witness and that steps needed to be taken…

WITNESS EVIDENCE, MEMORY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION OF THE PRINCIPLES

WITNESS EVIDENCE, MEMORY AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASES: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION OF THE PRINCIPLES

December 9, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

We looked yesterday at the judgment  of HHJ Tindal in Freeman -v- Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, a copy of which is available here. Freeman v Pennine NHS Judgment 03.12.21(without password) (1) The major part of that judgment contains a detailed…

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: THE COURT CONSIDERS WHAT WAS SAID – 17 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT

December 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

In HTR v Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 3228 (QB) Mr Justice Cotter considered the issue of the reliability of witness evidence when the events being considered occurred 17 years previously.  It is an example of the kind…

WHEN A WITNESS CHANGES A KEY PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE WHILST GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THIS DOES NOT END WELL

WHEN A WITNESS CHANGES A KEY PART OF THEIR EVIDENCE WHILST GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THIS DOES NOT END WELL

November 4, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In Murphy v Milton Keynes Parks Trust Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 2917 (QB) HHJ Crane considered that (relatively familiar) scenario of a party giving new evidence at the date of the trial.  The claimant, it must be emphasised, was…

MISSING WITNESSES: THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE

MISSING WITNESSES: THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS REALLY A MATTER OF COMMON SENSE

September 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has looked, many times, at the inferences that courts draw when witnesses do not give evidence at court. In Royal Mail Group Ltd v Efobi [2021] UKSC 33 the Supreme Court made it clear that the principles involved…

PROVING THINGS 213: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE, WITNESS EVIDENCE AND MEDICAL NOTES

August 3, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Sheard -v- Cao Tri Do [2021] EWHC 2166 (QB) HHJ Robinson, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, had to consider competing witness evidence in the context of a medical negligence action.  It is an example of the…

PROVING THINGS 212: MISTAKE, TRUSTS & TAXATION: "IT IS CLEAR THAT HIS WITNESS STATEMENT WAS CONSTRUCTED WITH ONLY PASSING REFERENCE TO WHAT HIS EVIDENCE IN CHIEF WOULD BE IF CALLED TO GIVE ORAL EVIDENCE"

PROVING THINGS 212: MISTAKE, TRUSTS & TAXATION: “IT IS CLEAR THAT HIS WITNESS STATEMENT WAS CONSTRUCTED WITH ONLY PASSING REFERENCE TO WHAT HIS EVIDENCE IN CHIEF WOULD BE IF CALLED TO GIVE ORAL EVIDENCE”

July 29, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The adequacy of witness evidence was considered in detail in the judgment of Deputy Master Marsh in Dukeries Healthcare Ltd v Bay Trust International Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2086 (Ch). It shows the danger of setting out a case…

A PERSON GIVING EVIDENCE AS TO EARNINGS AND PENSION MAY (OR MAY NOT) BE AN EXPERT: COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUES

A PERSON GIVING EVIDENCE AS TO EARNINGS AND PENSION MAY (OR MAY NOT) BE AN EXPERT: COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUES

May 6, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

Returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Cavangh in  TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2021] EWHC 1179 (QB) the judge considered, but did not decide, whether statements from third parties as to earnings and pensions were…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: WITNESSES CAN, AND PROBABLY SHOULD, REFRESH THEIR MEMORY FROM CONTEMPORARY DOCUMENTS

WITNESS STATEMENTS: WITNESSES CAN, AND PROBABLY SHOULD, REFRESH THEIR MEMORY FROM CONTEMPORARY DOCUMENTS

April 30, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

Evidence of the degree and knowledge needed in drafting witness statements can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Jacobs in  Global Display Solutions Ltd & Ors v NCR Financial Solutions Group Ltd & Anor [2021] EWHC 1119 (Comm)….

"VARIOUS WITNESSES CAN ALL GIVE HONEST BUT NEVERTHELESS CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF A GIVEN EVENT": GESTMIN PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENT

“VARIOUS WITNESSES CAN ALL GIVE HONEST BUT NEVERTHELESS CONFLICTING ACCOUNTS OF A GIVEN EVENT”: GESTMIN PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE CONTEXT OF A ROAD TRAFFIC ACCIDENT

April 6, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In  Barrow & Ors v Merret & Anor [2021] EWHC 792 (QB) Richard Hermer QC (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) considered the guidance given in Gestmin in the context of a road traffic accident. It is a reminder…

"WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WITNESS STATEMENT AND SUBSTANTIVE SUBMISSIONS"

“WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A WITNESS STATEMENT AND SUBSTANTIVE SUBMISSIONS”

March 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The title of this piece is a search term that led someone to this blog today.  Again it caused me to repeat a point made several years ago on this blog.     THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN EVIDENCE AND SUBMISSIONS In a…

PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: "THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE... IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK"

PROVING THINGS 204: WHY FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE IS IMPORTANT: “THE FIRST HAND EVIDENCE… IS TO BE PREFERRED OVER THOSE WHO GAVE EVIDENCE FOR THE BANK”

February 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Lynch v Cadwallader & Anor [2021] EWHC 328 (Ch) Chief Insolvency Court Judge Briggs considered the Gestmin principles in a case where a bank failed to establish that a client had signed a guarantee. It is a good example…

A "WHOLLY UNRELIABLE" WITNESS IS NOT NECESSARILY A DISHONEST ONE:  ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ACCEPTED BY JUDGE

A “WHOLLY UNRELIABLE” WITNESS IS NOT NECESSARILY A DISHONEST ONE: ALLEGATIONS OF FUNDMENTAL DISHONESTY NOT ACCEPTED BY JUDGE

February 18, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Witness statements

In Brint v Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 290 (QB) HHJ Platts (sitting as a High Court Judge) rejected the defendant’s case that a witness who was “wholly unreliable” was also fundamentally dishonest.   “Failing…

ANOTHER UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO SQUEEZE EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT

ANOTHER UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPT TO SQUEEZE EXPERT EVIDENCE INTO A WITNESS STATEMENT

February 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

A common search term that leads to this blog is “opinion evidence in witness statements”,  this remains a major issue in many areas of practice.  It can be seen in the judgment of HHJ Hacon in Penhallurick v MD5 Ltd…

THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE WITNESS STATEMENTS: TURN DOWN £60,000 AND PAY OUT £90,000 INSTEAD...

THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE WITNESS STATEMENTS: TURN DOWN £60,000 AND PAY OUT £90,000 INSTEAD…

February 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Members Content, Well being, Witness statements

One case that exemplifies the dangers of taking an “incomplete” witness statement is the decision of Judge Keyser Q.C. In Kellie & Kellie -v- Wheatley & Lloyd Architects Ltd [2014] EWHC 2866(TCC.  This case  gives a working example of the…

VULNERABLE WITNESSES IN CIVIL PROCEEDINGS: THE NEW RULES: WEBINAR 22nd MARCH 2021

February 4, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Rule Changes, Webinar, Witness statements

I am presenting a webinar on the 22nd March 2021 dealing with the new rules relating to vulnerable witnesses in civil proceedings. The new rules are coming into force on the 6th April 2021.  These change the rules so that…

RULE CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE IN APRIL 2021(1): VULNERABLE WITNESSES AND THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE

February 2, 2021 · by gexall · in Amendment, Civil evidence, Members Content, Rule Changes, Witness statements

There are some rule changes coming into force in April this year, introduced by the Civil Procedure (Amendment) Rules 2021, these come into force on the 6th April 2021. AMENDMENT TO THE OVERRIDING OBJECTIVE The new rules are referred to,…

A WITNESS STATEMENT SHOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO ARGUE THE CASE: YET ANOTHER JUDICIAL REMINDER

January 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Webinar, Witness statements

In  Ceviz v Frawley & Anor [2021] EWHC 8 (Ch)  HHJ Keyser QC made observations about a witness statement.  This case highlights the need for practitioners to be aware of the limitations of witness statement.   If this kind of statement…

STRAIGHTFORWARD LANGUAGE IS BEST: MISSIVE FROM THE BENCH: LAYWYERS MAY HAVE IMPROVED OVER TIME - OTHERS HAVE NOT

STRAIGHTFORWARD LANGUAGE IS BEST: MISSIVE FROM THE BENCH: LAYWYERS MAY HAVE IMPROVED OVER TIME – OTHERS HAVE NOT

December 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Members Content

In Secretary of State for Business Energy And Industrial Strategy v Evans & Anor [2020] EWHC 3519 (Ch) (18 December 2020) Deputy Insolvency and Companies Court Judge Baister had something to say about the absence of plain language in the…

PROVING THINGS 191: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (II): A CLIENT QUESTIONNAIRE

PROVING THINGS 191: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (II): A CLIENT QUESTIONNAIRE

December 10, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury

Here we return to the basic issue of proving loss of income.  This often applies in personal injury action, but is an issue that can arise in several other types of litigation.  We have a questionnaire on the single issue…

PROVING THINGS 190: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (1) : THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT: THE QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK

PROVING THINGS 190: PROVING LOSS OF EARNINGS (1) : THE IMPORTANCE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT: THE QUESTIONS YOU SHOULD ASK

December 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Useful links, Witness statements

The basic task of proving damages, particularly elements such as loss of earnings and disability in the labour market, are often overlooked in witness statements prepared for trial, both in personal injury actions and other actions were loss of income…

A BARRISTER OF “GOOD JUDGEMENT”: WHEN THE PERSON WHO USUALLY DOES THE CROSS-EXAMINING IS IN THE WITNESS BOX

December 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Jay in Torrance v Bradberry [2020] EWHC 3260 (QB) is one that should be read by every practising lawyer. It is a case of a lawyer as defendant, being accused of negligence in their conduct…

PROVING THINGS 189: IF YOU WANT TO PROVE THE DEPTH OF SOMETHING - TAKE A RULER (OH, AND PHOTOGRAPHS)

PROVING THINGS 189: IF YOU WANT TO PROVE THE DEPTH OF SOMETHING – TAKE A RULER (OH, AND PHOTOGRAPHS)

November 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury, Witness statements

In Nash v Hertfordshire County Council [2020] EWHC 3247 (QB) HHJ Lickley QC, sitting as judge of the High Court, dismissed the claimant’s claim for damages.  There were numerous witnesses and expert involved. “They took photographs when they were at…

IT'S NOT YOUR OPPONENT'S JOB TO POINT OUT OMISSIONS IN YOUR OWN EVIDENCE: A CLOSER LOOK AT ONE ASPECT OF PJSC TATNEFT

IT’S NOT YOUR OPPONENT’S JOB TO POINT OUT OMISSIONS IN YOUR OWN EVIDENCE: A CLOSER LOOK AT ONE ASPECT OF PJSC TATNEFT

November 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Written advocacy

One particular aspect of the judgment in PJSC Tatneft v Bogolyubov & Ors [2020] EWHC 3250 (Comm) that warrants closer investigation. That is the claimant’s argument that it did not have notice that the defendants were going to invite the court…

MORE ON OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: DEFENDANT'S STATEMENT LARGELY STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE

MORE ON OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT LARGELY STRUCK OUT AS AN ABUSE

November 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Flaxby Park Ltd v Harrogate Borough Council [2020] EWHC 3204 (Admin) that was looked at yesterday referred to the earlier case of JD Wetherspoon plc v Harris [2013] 1 WLR 3296.  Since that decision pre-dated this blog. I thought it…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN NOTICE TO RELY ON HEARSAY EVIDENCE NOT SERVED AHEAD OF TRIAL

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS GRANTED WHEN NOTICE TO RELY ON HEARSAY EVIDENCE NOT SERVED AHEAD OF TRIAL

November 23, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Sanctions, Witness statements

In  ST (A Minor) & Anor v L Primary School (Rev 2) [2020] EWHC 1046 (QB) Deputy Master Hill QC granted relief from sanctions where the claimant failed to serve a notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence prior…

WITNESS STATEMENTS COULD BE DISCLOSED IF MENTIONED IN OPEN COURT: DEPP, THE UNCALLED WITNESSES AND THE MEDIA

WITNESS STATEMENTS COULD BE DISCLOSED IF MENTIONED IN OPEN COURT: DEPP, THE UNCALLED WITNESSES AND THE MEDIA

November 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

There are many aspects of the judgment in Depp II v News Group Newspapers Ltd & Anor [2020] EWHC 2911 (QB) that have gained wide media attention.  Here I want to look at two issues in relation to the failure…

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 gexall · 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…

WITNESSES AT SEA: EVIDENCE FROM THE HIGH SEAS

WITNESSES AT SEA: EVIDENCE FROM THE HIGH SEAS

October 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Remote hearings

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

WITNESS EVIDENCE AND COUNTER-SCHEDULE STRUCK OUT AS INADMISSIBLE: THE PRINCIPLES APPLIED

September 16, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

“LITIGATION WISHFUL THINKING”: A REMINDER OF ITS IMPORTANCE

September 7, 2020 · by gexall · 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…

WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS?  A REVIEW OF THE CASES

WHEN SHOULD A SOLICITOR MAKE A WITNESS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENTS? A REVIEW OF THE CASES

July 6, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: A DUTY TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST AND SCRUPULOUSLY ACCURATE

June 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

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

WITNESS STATEMENTS “NOT IN MY STOCK IN TRADE”: HIGH COURT JUDGE HIGHLY CRITICAL OF ARGUMENTATIVE AND LARGELY IRRELEVANT WITNESS STATEMENTS

June 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Summary judgment, 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

WITNESS STATEMENTS: EDITED HIGHLIGHTS OF THE REPORT OF THE WITNESS EVIDENCE WORKING GROUP: THE BUSINESS AND PROPERTY COURTS

June 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

OPINION EVIDENCE AND DEFECTIVE WITNESS STATEMENTS: EVIDENCE NOT ALLOWED AT TRIAL

June 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

In Harlow -v- Aspect Contracts Ltd [2020] EWHC 1488 (TCC) 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,…

COVID REPEATS 43: FAREPAK: "A DOCUMENT CREATED IN THE LANGUAGE OF LAWYERS BY THE LAWYERS"

COVID REPEATS 43: FAREPAK: “A DOCUMENT CREATED IN THE LANGUAGE OF LAWYERS BY THE LAWYERS”

June 5, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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

COVID REPEATS 41: OFFICE GOSSIP IS NOT EVIDENCE

June 3, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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)

COVID REPEATS 40: ASKING LEADING QUESTIONS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS IS GOING TO END BADLY: EIGHT CRUCIAL POINTS ON EVIDENCE (& THEN 10 MORE)

June 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

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"

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”

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

← Previous 1 … 5 6 7 … 14 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

  • BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: SOME KEY POINTS ABOUT WITNESS SUMMARIES
  • EXPERT WATCH 80: WHEN EXPERTS ARE ON THE METER: ONE EXPERT WAS NOT ALWAYS INDEPENDENT, THE OTHER DID NOT APPRECIATE HIS DUTY TO THE COURT
  • PERMISSION TO RELY ON A WITNESS SUMMARY: DOES THE APPLICANT NEED TO SHOW THE WITNESS HAS REFUSED TO GIVE A STATEMENT? RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS (OH, AND THAT WITNESS FORMERLY KNOWN AS “PRINCE”)
  • COST BITES 448: PART 36 AND FIXED COSTS: “VERY LATE” ACCEPTANCE OF A DEFENDANT’S OFFER LEADS TO THE CLAIMANT RECOVERING NO COSTS AT ALL
  • COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)

Top Posts

COST BITES 447: “THESE SUMS ARE ASTONISHING”: COURT OF APPEAL CONSIDERS £2 MILLION BRIEF FEE AND COSTS OF A FOUR-DAY APPEAL (AND IS NOT TOO IMPRESSED)
SERVICE POINTS 55: THE SOLICITORS DISCIPLINARY TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT A SOLICITOR WAS TELLING LIES ABOUT SERVICE: SOLICITOR STRUCK OFF (DON'T LET THIS HAPPEN TO YOU...)
EXPERT WATCH 78 : "ROWING BACK"?: WHEN AN EXPERT CHANGES THEIR VIEW AFTER THE JOINT REPORT: "THAT IS NOT THE FAIR OR PROPER WAY FOR PUTTING NEW EXPERT EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT"
CONDITIONAL FEE AGREEMENTS, CHANGE OF SOLICITORS AND RATIFICATION AND INFORMED ADVICE: IT IS NOT SO EASY TO SIMPLY RECOMMEND A CHANGE OF SOLICITORS...
DID YOU KNOW THAT YOU COULD BE MADE BANKRUPT (OSTENSIBLY ON YOUR OWN APPLICATION), NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT - AND THEN HAVE TO PAY THE TRUSTEE'S COSTS? THE IMPORTANCE OF GETTING KEY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT

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.