FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE TASK OF THE TRIAL JUDGE: A REASONED DETERMINATION OF THE DISPUTE ON THE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL – NOT A SEARCH FOR “THE TRUTH”
There has been a spate of cases recently relating to appeals of findings of fact by a trial judge. There are major problems in such appeals, this is illustrated by the judgment of Mr Justice Andrew Baker in Auliffe &…
THE DANGERS OF A LAWYER GIVING EVIDENCE: A “SOMEWHAT STRANGLED VERSION” OF THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION & BELIEF: SUMMARY JUDGMENT APPLICATION DISMISSED BECAUSE OF PAUCITY OF FIRST-HAND EVIDENCE
There are numerous posts on the blog about the need for first-hand evidence to be given, and the dangers of a lawyer making witness statements. These risks are exemplified in the judgment of Chief Master Marsh today in The David…
GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (4): THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT IS NOT A DEMIGOD
This blog looked recently at the case of O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23 where the trial judge was critical of a jointly instructed expert’s attempt to find facts and state that something was “proven by overwhelming evidence”. That case contains…
ASKING QUESTIONS AFTER JUDGMENT: NOT TO BE USED IN AN ATTEMPT TO RE-OPEN THE CASE (OR ARGUE A DIFFERENT CASE ON DIFFERENT GROUNDS)
I am looking again at the decision in O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23. That case predates the more recent Court of Appeal judgment in Children [2019] EWCA Civ 898. However it is another example of a party attempting to use the…
THE APPOINTMENT OF A SINGLE JOINT EXPERT DOES NOT DISPLACE THE TRIAL JUDGE: EXPERTS SHOULD NOT “OVERREACH”
In O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23 Mr Recorder Allen QC noted that a Single Joint Expert had gone beyond their remit in making findings of “fact”. The parties do not “abdicate” findings to a single joint experts and the…
PROVING THINGS 153: “YOU DO NOT WIN A CASE ON INCONSISTENCIES”: WHEN THE APPLICANTS “PURSUED A CONFUSED AND POORLY EVIDENCED CASE FOR LITTLE PURPOSE”
Most cases are lost not on issues of law but on issues of evidence. In Stewart & Ors v Watkin [2019] EWHC 1311 (Ch) ICC Judge Barber was particularly scathing of the quality of the applicants’ evidence. The judgment contains…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 47: THE FORMAL (AND MANDATORY) REQUIREMENTS OF A WITNESS STATEMENT: A CHECKLIST
Another short post caused by a discussion on Twitter about the number of witness statements that fail to comply with the most basic, mandatory, obligations in the Rules. The formal requirements of a witness statement are overlooked at the litigator’s…
PROVING THINGS 152: CLAIMANT, BRINGING ACTION 50 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT, NOT QUITE THROWN TO THE WOLVES, BUT…
Davies v Wolverhampton Wanderers Football Club (1986) Ltd [2019] EWHC 1252 (Ch) is an example of a case that rested on a very thin strand of , as it turned out extremely flimsy, evidence. “He is giving evidence about events…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 45: THE COURT CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL
We are looking at CPR 33.2(3) in relation to the reducing of witnesses or identifying issues prior to trial. THE RULE CPR 32.2(3) “(3) The court may give directions – (a) identifying or limiting the issues to which factual…
PROVING THINGS 149: A JUDGE CAN FIND DISHONESTY ON THE FACTS BEFORE THEM EVEN IF IT IS NOT PLEADED
We are staying with the decision of HHJ Melissa Clarke in ATB Sales Ltd v Rich Energy Ltd & Anor [2019] EWHC 1207 (IPEC). The claimant in that case had not pleaded fraud. The judge rejected the argument that the absence…
TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 1: SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATOR
I have been at the APIL annual conference this week. Ostensibly to give a talk about expert evidence, but a blogger (indeed any practising lawyer) can never miss an opportunity to pick up ideas. I went to a “Fee earner…
ASSESSING EVIDENCE 26 YEARS AFTER THE EVENT: THE JUDICIAL APPROACH
In Taylor v Chesterfield Royal Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1043 (Ch) John Kimbell QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the question of assessing evidence of a brief incident, 26 years after the event, in a case…
DOES THE BASIC LAW OF EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE RUN IN THE IMMIGRATION IMMIGRATION UPPER TRIBUNAL? A MATTER OF CONCERN TO US ALL
The Immigration Upper Tribunal does not appear to recognise some of the basic principles of civil evidence and appellate jurisdiction. Certainly this is the impression you get when reading the judgment of Lord Justice Davis in Palash v Secretary of…
WITNESS STATEMENTS WHEN THE WITNESS CANNOT READ ENGLISH: NOT GROUNDS FOR STRIKING OUT, RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS MAY NOT BE REQUIRED
In Waraich & Anor v Ansari Solicitors (A firm) [2019] EWHC 1038 (Comm) HHJ Pearce (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered the issues that arose when a point arose at the beginning of a trial in relation to signature…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 34: “THE SOURCES OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF” IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: 10 KEY POINTS
The maker of a witness statement must given the source of their information or belief. This obligation is often overlooked, or simply paid lip service to. However the careful following of this rule could prevent many of the common problems we…
GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: JUST BECAUSE THE COURT HAS SAID YOU MAY – IT DOESN’T MEAN YOU WILL: HOW TO FAIL OF YOUR OWN ACCORD
Trials are always stressful events for the participants. They require careful preparation and are usually subject to close case management. Imagine the difficulties when you turn up at the trial and the judge says that the evidence you are relying…
ADVICE FOR THE ASPIRANT OR TYRO LAWYER: WHEN TWITTER CAN BE YOUR FRIEND (IN FACT YOU CAN HAVE DOZENS OF FRIENDS GIVING YOU ADVICE)
This is a post started almost by accident. It started with a tweet when a barrister was happy to be sitting on her sofa, for a change and said this is the reality of legal life. It led to dozens…
A WITNESS STATEMENT IS NOT A PLACE TO VENT YOUR SPLEEN: “DEPLORABLE PERSONAL ATTACKS” COULD HAVE AN EFFECT ON COSTS
There is a short closing remark in Mr Justice Mostyn’s judgment in Rothschild v Charmaine De Souza [2018] EWHC 1855 (Fam) that shows the danger of including personal attacks in witness statements. It is comforting to see how often this type…
“LEAVE AN UNTRUTHFUL MAN IN THE WITNESS BOX LONG ENOUGH AND HE WILL REVEAL HIMSELF TO THE WORLD”: WHEN A WITNESS FALLS..
I have lost count of the number of times people have asked me where they can find that “Canadian” case “you know, the one with the judge”. It is a case about witness credibility, in a blunt style. The Hearing Clinic…
SOMETHING FOR THE WEEKEND: THE THIRD POST THIS WEEK ABOUT THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH: WHEN A SOLICITOR SIGNS A STATEMENT OF TRUTH ON BEHALF OF A CLIENT
I am returning, again, to the consequences of the Court of Appeal judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392, “the deliberate or reckless making of a false statement in a document verified by a statement of…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER: A FURTHER RECAP : WHAT IS YOUR SYSTEM IF THE WITNESS BLAMES YOU?
This topic follows directly on from the post yesterday about the significance of the statement of truth. In particular the Court of Appeal’s observation that “the deliberate or reckless making of a false statement in a document verified by a statement…
WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO SIGN A DOCUMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF TRUTH: OR SIGN ONE YOURSELF: BEST READ THIS IF YOU DON’T WANT TO GO TO JAIL
The judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 goes much further than a warning to errant experts. It contains important observations that must be considered by the entire profession. Particularly those who draft statements, and those…
THE POST OFFICE CASE (AGAIN): STRIKING OUT PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DEFENDANT WITH SUPERNATURAL POWERS
For the third time today I am writing about the case of Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd [2018] EWHC 2698 (QB). However we are now looking at the earlier interlocutory application by the defendant to strike out large parts…
ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: WHEN POST OFFICE WITNESSES DO NOT DELIVER
The judgment in Bates & Ors v Post Office Ltd (No 3) [2019] EWHC 606 (QB) is 1122 paragraphs long, following a two week long trial. There are aspects of this case I will look at again. However, it is interesting…
WHEN ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDINGS GO WRONG: IF YOU CAN’T OPERATE BY THE RULES THEY MAY TAKE YOUR LICENCE AWAY…
The enforcement of judgments is an aspect of civil procedure that rarely makes the law reports. In Rooftops South West Ltd & Ors v Ash Interiors (UK) Ltd & Ors [2018] EWHC 2799 (QB) Master Davison was highly critical of the…
PROVING THINGS 145: WHEN EXPERTS ARE OF NO HELP AT ALL: IT IS THE FACTS THAT WON IT
I am giving a seminar on “Expert Witnesses and Liability” at the APIL Annual Conference in May. The judgment of HHJ McKenna (sitting as a High Court judge) in Al-Iqra & Ors v DSG Retail Ltd [2019] EWHC 429 (QB) gives…
“OUTSIDE THE REALMS OF FICTION”, NOT NECESSARILY A PRUDENT WAY TO CONDUCT LITIGATION: WITNESS STATEMENTS, WITNESS SUMMARIES AND RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS:
In Otuo v The Watch Tower Bible And Tract Society of Britain (Relief from Sanctions 2) [2019] EWHC 346 (QB) Mr Justice Warby granted limited relief from sanctions to a litigant in person who had served “witness summaries” rather than witness…
PROVING THINGS 143: THE COURTS DON’T REALLY APPRECIATE EVIDENCE COMING FROM THE NEWS RATHER THAN THE PARTIES: (SHIPS, I SEE NO SHIPS)
In The Channel Tunnel Group Ltd & Anor (t/a “Eurotunnel”) v Secretary of State for Transport [2019] EWHC 419 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser expressed concern that witness statements served by the Secretary of State in a civil action were almost immediately…
PROVING THINGS 142: CLAIMANT HAS TO PROVE SIZE OF HIGHWAY DEFECT: PHOTOGRAPHS THAT WERE “ALMOST COMPLETELY USELESS”
The judgment today in Walsh v The Council of the Borough of Kirklees [2019] EWHC 492 (QB) contains an important message for anyone involved in highway or “tripper” litigation: the claimant has to have evidence to prove the size of the…
THE DANGERS OF TAKING A ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENT – A RECAP
A number of recent posts have looked at difficulties caused the the way in which evidence was collected and witness statements drafted. The taking of one-sided witness statements led to major difficulties for the party who were attempting to rely…
WITNESS EVIDENCE: GRAPPLE WITH THOSE DIFFICULTIES: KNOW WHETHER YOU CAN PROVE YOUR CASE: OTHERWISE IT IS GOING TO COST YOU (ALSO THE IMPORTANCE OF AN OFFER)
The previous post looked at the witness evidence of some of the claimants against one of the defendants in the case of Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC). Here we look at the…
WHEN WITNESSES GO “UP HILL AND DOWN DALE” IN AN ATTEMPT TO JUSTIFY THE UNJUSTIFIABLE: TIME TO LOOK AT THE WAY STATEMENTS ARE PREPARED
The judgment of HHJ Stephen Davies (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Zagora Management Ltd & Ors v Zurich Insurance Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 140 (TCC) shows why witness statements should be considered carefully prior to…
KEEP YOUR WITNESS STATEMENTS SHORT AND TO THE POINT: A SHOT ACROSS THE LITIGANTS’ BOWS
In Avonwick Holdings Ltd v Azitio Holdings & Ors [2019] EWHC 305 (Comm) Mr Justice Andrew Baker refused the defendants’ application for an adjournment of a trial date. When doing so he sent a clear message as to the way in…
DEFENDANTS REFUSED RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: INADEQUATE EXPLANATIONS WILL NOT SUFFICE
In Consult II SRO & Ors v Shire Warwick Lewis Capital Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 286 (Comm) Andrew Henshaw QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) refused the defendants’ application for relief from sanctions. The lack of a candid explanation…
“IF EVER THERE WERE A CASE IN WHICH THE COURT SHOULD REFUSE TO EXERCISE ITS DISCRETION IN FAVOUR OF GIVING THE CLAIMANTS ANY FURTHER INDULGENCE, THIS IS IT”
The judgment in Jetly & Anor v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2019] EWHC 204 (Admin) sets out a series of surprising events. Mrs Justice Andrews came down very firmly against granting relief from sanctions. Many of the…
PROVING THINGS 141: CREDIBILITY WAS IMPORTANT IN CLAIM FOR DAMAGES AGAINST SOLICITORS: SUPREME COURT RESTORES DECISION OF TRIAL JUDGE
In Perry v Raleys Solicitors [2019] UKSC 5 the Supreme Court restored the decision of the trial judge in relation to damages. One of the key issues was whether the Court of Appeal was correct to overturn the trial judge’s factual…
VIEWING THE WOOD FROM THE TREES: ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: A “CUT OUT AND KEEP” GUIDE
The judgment of Teare J in Deripaska and Danilina v Chernukhin case [2019] EWHC 173 (Comm), is (at present) only available via a link on the Serle Court website. It is useful in that a few paragraphs encapsulate the judicial approach to…
WHEN WITNESS STATEMENTS ARE USELESS (AND PROBABLY HARMFUL): A FEW CASES TO ILLUSTRATE A COMMON POINT
For the third (and last) time I am returning to the judgment of HHJ Halliwell in Currie v Thornley & Anor [2019] EWHC. 172 (Ch). This time the judge’s observations in relation to witness statements. Using witness statements to “argue” the case…
HAVING A COPY OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AVAILABLE AT COURT: IT IS IN THE RULES
One other aspect of the decision in Prosser v British Airways Plc [2018] EW Misc B13 is worth noting. There was a rare reference to the requirements of CPR 32.13(1). Copy witness statements must be available at the trial for inspection. …
PROVING THINGS 139: WHEN THE JUDGE HAS TO DECIDE WHETHER ITS ALL BEEN A BIT OF A CRUSH
Most of the cases looked at in this series are decisions in the High Court. However issues of witness credibility and accuracy are a constant issue throughout virtually every layer of court and tribunal. In Prosser v British Airways Plc [2018]…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 27: WAIVING LEGAL PROFESSIONAL PRIVILEGE IN A WITNESS STATEMENT
One matter that all litigators must be aware of is that there is a risk of waiving privilege when mentioning legal advice in a witness statement. This can (and does) happen even when the statement states, expressly, that the maker…
ASSESSING WITNESS CREDIBILITY: EX-FOOTBALL CLUB DIRECTORS’ EVIDENCE: ITS ALL A LOAD OF COBBLERS
This blog has looked at issues of witness credibility many times. There is a useful summary in the judgment of HHJ Simon Barker QC in Northampton Borough Council v Cardoza & Ors [2019] EWHC 26 (Ch) contains a review of the…
PROVING THINGS 138 : A WHOPPER OF AN OMISSION: McDONALD’S FAILS TO PROVE TRADEMARK RIGHTS TO “BIG MAC”: ADEQUATE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ON THE MENU
I am grateful to Yisroel for pointing out the decision of the European Union Intellectual Property Office in the “Big Mac” case. It is not my usual reading. However Yisroel points out that McDonald’s failed because of a basic failure…
PROVING THINGS 137: PROVING A DEFENCE TO A COUNTERCLAIM: NO EVIDENCE TO PROVE MATTERS – THEN JUDGMENT IS GOING TO BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU
The judgment in UK Dry Risers Ltd v Maher [2019] EWHC 44 (QB) shows the importance of being able to prove a defence to a counterclaim. The claimant succeeded on a claim for £3,690.72, the defendant obtained a judgment for £13,628.00. …
“A MISUSE OF JUDICIAL POWER”: A WITNESS SPEAKING TO LAWYER IN THE COURSE OF GIVING EVIDENCE DOES NOT JUSTIFY COMMITTAL OR STRIKING OUT A CASE
In the judgment today in Hughes Jarvis Ltd v Searle & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ the Court of Appeal robustly overturned a decision committing a witness to prison and striking out a case. It was found that the trial judge had,…
WITNESS STATEMENTS AND TRANSLATION: WHY YOU CAN’T RELY ON PD 22 IN RELATION TO WITNESS STATEMENTS
This is the third post on this subject in one day. Someone responded to the first post on the need to for witness statements to be in the language of the witness by asserting that Practice Direction 22 could be…
WHEN A WITNESS CANNOT SPEAK ENGLISH: INTERPRETING THE RULES: GUIDANCE FROM THE CASES
If a witness cannot speak English and a witness statement is required what needs to be done? There are several cases where the issue of translation has caused a problem at trial. The best guidance comes from the Family Division….
ADVERSE INFERENCES DRAWN WHEN SOLICITOR DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE: IF YOU’VE HAD £22 MILLION YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN IT
In The Lord Chancellor v Blavo & Co Solictors Ltd & Anor [2018] EWHC 3556 (QB) Mr Justice Pepperall found it was appropriate to draw adverse inferences when key participants did not give evidence. It is another example of the principles…
“MY SOLICITOR WROTE THAT STATEMENT”: A FAMILIAR TALE: HAVING A PLAN TO PROTECT YOURSELF
The previous post dealt with a case where the claimant’s witness statement was found to be “largely fictional”. This coincided with a number of posts on Twitter with various lawyers and judges (duly anonymous) commented on the situations in which…
PROVING THINGS 136: THE IMPORTANCE OF CROSS-EXAMINATION – YET AGAIN: FAILURE TO CROSS-EXAMINE RESPONDENT LEADS TO FINDINGS BEING SET ASIDE
For the second time in a week I am reporting on the importance of cross-examination, albeit from a slightly different angle. The importance of putting the case to a witness arises clearly and squarely in the judgment of Mr Justice…
You must be logged in to post a comment.