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”
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
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
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…
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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
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”
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
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) 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”
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”
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….
A WITNESS STATEMENT “SIGNED OFF ON, WITH INSUFFICIENT CONSIDERATION AND SCRUTINY”
Lawyers are always, one would hope, telling clients and witnesses to read draft witness statements with care prior to signing them. An example of the problems that a failure to consider the matter in detail can be seen in the…
“GOOD DAYS AND BAD DAYS”: FINDINGS OF FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY AT TRIAL – AN EXAMPLE
Last month I reviewed the judgment of Mr Justice Birss in Grant -v- Newport City Council [2018] EWHC 3813. In that case the judge allowed the defendant to adduce surveillance evidence, even though it was adduced late. I am grateful to Mark…
WITNESS STATEMENTS, WITNESS EVIDENCE AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER
Every few years I repeat advice given in relation to the need for “self-protection” when drafting witness statements. This is often caused by something I have seen in practice, questions I am asked, or a transcript of a case. The…
THE PRODUCTION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: NOW BEING SUBJECT TO RESEARCH: CAN YOU HELP?
This blog has looked, many times, at issues relating to the drafting of witness statements. The Institute for Crime and Justice Policy Research is carrying out research on this subject, in the context of witness evidence in employment tribunals, “Taking…
GIVING EVIDENCE OF MATTERS THAT HAPPENED 17 YEARS EARLIER: AN EXAMPLE IN THE CONTEXT OF CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE
This blog has looked at the issues relating to memory and witness evidence many times. Particularly the problems of people giving evidence many years after the event. An example of these difficulties can be seen in the judgment of Mrs…
APPLICATIONS FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: 10 KEY POINTS
We are now nearly six years on from the Denton decision and the principles are familiar to most litigators. However applications for relief from sanctions are still a regular occurrence. Success is never guaranteed. Here I want to look again at…
PROVING THINGS 171: A TALE OF TWO TELEVISION PRESENTERS (AND OF A CASE WHERE THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE AT ALL ON VITAL ISSUES)
The judgment of the Employment Tribunal in the case of Ahmed -v- BBC (10th January 2019) has already received wide publicity. It is worthwhile looking at the paucity, often the total absence of evidence, on many key issues on the…
11th HOUR APPLICATION TO INTRODUCE NEW WITNESS EVIDENCE (AND A NEW CASE) REFUSED
In Crumpler & Anor (Liquidators Of Peak Hotels And Resorts Ltd v Candey Limited [2019] EWHC 3558 (Ch) HHJ Davis-White QC (sitting as a High Court judge) refused a party relief from sanctions where witness statements were served late. The…
PROVING THINGS 170: YOU CAN’T GIVE EVIDENCE BY WAY OF SUBMISSIONS (HONESTLY, YOU CAN’T)
One important aspect of the judgment in Bates & Ors v the Post Office Ltd (No 6: Horizon Issues) [2019] EWHC 3408 (QB) is the judge’s criticism of the defendant’s attempt to give “evidence” at the stage of closing submissions….
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – A ROUND UP OF THE ROUND UPS: WHAT TO FRET ABOUT AND WHAT NOT TO FRET ABOUT…
There have been a series of annual reviews on key topics throughout December. To round off the year it seemed a good idea to provide a reminder of them all and put the links in one place 2019 AND CIVIL…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 74: HEARSAY EVIDENCE AND SECTION 4 OF THE CIVIL EVIDENCE ACT 1995
The judgment of Deputy Master Linwood in Barnaby & Anor v Johnson (aka Smith) [2019] EWHC 3344 (Ch) provides a reminder of the terms of Section 4 of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 and an example of its application. …
2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE – THE YEAR IN REVIEW (4): FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY
There have been relatively few cases about fundamental dishonesty this year. However the cases that have been reported have all been interesting. The first involves a failing adverse to the defendant. The second highlights the point that there is no…
WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY
The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 makes some important points in relation to civil evidence. It reviews the law relating to the drawing of adverse inferences due…


You must be logged in to post a comment.