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 statements » Page 11

ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: IS IT VALID? A FIRST INSTANCE DECISION

July 2, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The question of whether a witness statement can be signed electronically is often described as an “open” issue. It was considered by District Judge Jenkinson in Fitzpatrick -v- AIG Europe Ltd (Liverpool County Court 1st July 2015*). THE CASE The…

IF YOU CAN'T PROVE IT YOU DON'T GET IT: CALLING EVIDENCE AT COURT TO PROVE A LOSS: A WORKING EXAMPLE

June 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

A party claiming damages must bring evidence to court to prove the losses it claims.  This is a simple statement. However adducing evidence which actually proves the losses claimed often gives rise to difficulties in all spheres of litigation.  The…

LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCEEDINGS: DON'T GO TO COLLEGE – JUST READ THE RULES

June 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

In R (on the application of the London College of Finance & Accounting) -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 1688 (Admin) Mr Justice Cobb made some important observations in relation to the late service of evidence…

OPINION EVIDENCE IN WITNESS STATEMENTS AND THE CASE THAT MAY HAVE SPARKED OFF THE JACKSON REFORMS: Multiplex -v- Cleveland Bridge

June 15, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Experts, Members Content

Whilst doing some work on the problems caused when lay witnesses attempt to give expert evidence I came across the case of  Multiplex Constructions (UK) LImited -v- Cleveland Bridge UK Limited [2008] EWHC 2220(TCC). It makes interesting reading for a…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS, LATE WITNESS STATEMENTS AND LITIGANTS IN PERSON

June 9, 2015 · by gexall · in Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Warren in Chadwick -v- Burling [2015] EWHC 1610 (Ch) highlights some important issues in relation to relief from sanctions in general, and the position of litigants in person in particular. THE CASE The applicant in…

WITNESS EVIDENCE, CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND CLINICAL NOTES: A CASE IN POINT

June 6, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of Mr Justice Jay in FB -v- Rana & Princes Alexandra Hospital NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1536 contains another interesting consideration of the value of witness evidence and contemporary records in a clinical negligence case.  I was recently…

OVERTURNING FINDINGS OF FACTS AND "INFERENCES" ON APPEAL

June 5, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In Vann -v-Ocidental [2015] EWCA Civ 572 the Court of Appeal overturned a finding that there was no contributory negligence. There is an interesting discussion about appeals on findings of fact and the inferences that the judge draws from those…

"TOUCH SENSITIVE" WITNESS STATEMENTS AND OTHER FORMS OF EVIDENCE: WHEN THE CLAIMANTS COLLECT THE EVIDENCE THEMSELVES

May 26, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The decision of Recorder Amanda Michaels (sitting as a Deputy Enterprise Judge) in Minder Music Ltd -v- Sharples [2015] EWHC 1454 (IPEC) raises some interesting issues in relation to witness statements and evidence. In particular the problems when a party…

MORE ON "CHANGING" WITNESS STATEMENTS AND CREDIBILITY: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

May 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Liability, Members Content, Rule Changes

A post yesterday commented upon the difficulties caused when a witness produces two (sometimes contradictory) witness statements. Another example of witness evidence leading to problems at trial can be seen in the judgment of HH Judge Collender QC (sitting as…

THAT "DIFFICULT SECOND STATEMENT": IT IS HARDLY EVER GOING TO BE A HIT

May 17, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment in Buswell -v- Symes [2015] EWHC 1379 (QB) illustrates the dangers of “supplementary “witness statements. Real problems can occur for the party putting in the new evidence. THE CASE The claimant was seriously injured when his motorcycle was…

LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & ENTERPRISE COURT: HANDED OVER ON A PLATE?

LATE WITNESS EVIDENCE AND WITNESS CREDIBILITY IN THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY & ENTERPRISE COURT: HANDED OVER ON A PLATE?

May 14, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The Intellectual Property Enterprise Court is likely to be a model of good practice. Basically designed to ensure the SMEs can protect their intellectual property rights without going broke in the process it has a fairly robust approach to procedure…

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…

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…

ANOTHER LATE WITNESS STATEMENT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED

April 22, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

There is a brief report on Lawtel of the decision of Judge Robinson in Buswell -v- Symes (QBD 20/04/2015) this involves another case where a witness statement was served late and permission to rely upon that statement was refused. *…

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…

WITNESS STATEMENTS, EXHIBITS AND NOT MAKING AN EXHIBITION OF YOURSELF: THE OFTEN IGNORED RULES ABOUT EXHIBITS TO WITNESS STATEMENTS

April 10, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Costs, Liability, Members Content

Your life will not be complete unless you have read a post about exhibits to witness statements. The “exhibiting” of documents is common. It is surprising how common it is for the exhibit, and the witness statement, to fail to…

LAY EVIDENCE AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: MORE IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER

March 31, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Wake -v- Johnson [2015] EWHC 276(QB) HH Judge Collender QC (Sitting as Judge of the High Court) conducted a critical analysis of the lay evidence and expert evidence when dismissing a clinical negligence claim against a GP.  There are…

PLEADINGS, EVIDENCE & PUTTING THE CLAIMANT TO PROOF: AHMED -v- LALIK & THE CO-OP

March 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Damages, Liability, Members Content, Statements of Case

In Ahmed -v- Lalik & Co-operative Insurance Society Limited [2015] EWCA 651 (QB) Mr Justice Cranston considered some important issues in relation to pleading, evidence and procedure in a case where a defendant insurer has suspicions about the nature of…

INADEQUATE WITNESS STATEMENTS LEAD TO CASE BEING STRUCK OUT AT TRIAL

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Damages, Disclosure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Witness statements

We have looked at the case of  Devon & Cornwall Autistic Community Trust -v- Cornwall Council before.  In the first report Mr Justice Green refused an application to adjourn a trial date but gave permission to serve witness evidence late….

DECIDING CASES ON PAPER: WOODLANDS, EVIDENCE & DECIDING CASES "ONLINE"

February 24, 2015 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The decision in Woodland -v- Maxwell looked at in an earlier blog is interesting because it is one of the rare cases where the Court of Appeal carried out a (brief) analysis of the evidence in the case more than…

LENGTHY BUNDLES AND INTERIM COSTS: OBSERVATIONS FROM THE TECHNOLOGY & CONSTRUCTION COURT

February 18, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Costs, Members Content, Witness statements, Written advocacy

The two judgments of Mr Justice Akenhead in the Secretary of State for the Home Environment -v- Raythean Systems Limited [2014] EWHC 4375 (TCC) and [2015] EWHC 311 (TCC) contain some familiar motifs in relation to the size of bundles,…

WITHDRAWING FROM ADMISSIONS, MISTAKES AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES

February 16, 2015 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a report on Lawtel of the decision of Judge Bidder QC in Moore -v- Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust [12/02/15].* This case demonstrates some of the difficult issues in relation to the law of withdrawing from admissions. THE…

THE ADVOCATE AS WITNESS: PROCEDURE WHEN A REPRESENTATIVE HAS TO GIVE EVIDENCE

December 22, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Previous posts have dealt with the problem of defining the line between submissions and evidence – with the dangers that an advocate could be “giving evidence”. However there are circumstances in which an advocate may have to give evidence as…

LIMITATION, PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT: AN IMPORTANT LESSON

December 15, 2014 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil Procedure, Limitation, Members Content, Witness statements

The case of Seton House Group -v- Mercer Ltd [2014] EWHC 4234 (Ch) shows the importance of being certain of a limitation period and issuing well before that date. In this case, however, the limitation period had passed well before the…

THE MITCHELL JUDGMENT 3: WHY MR MITCHELL WASN'T TELLING LIES AND P.C. ROWLAND WAS TELLING THE TRUTH

December 6, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

This blog has  looked at the fact finding process in the Mitchell judgment several times already.  Here I want to look at the issue of the “truth”. This is an issue that has wider implications for those involved in the…

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…

MORE ON EVIDENCE AND CAUSATION: A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

November 28, 2014 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

The previous post dealt with issues of evidence and causation. Similar issues can be seen in the case of Irene Packham -v- Anita Hazari [2014] EWHC 3951 (QB), a decision of Michael Harvey Q.C.  The issue of causation and evidence…

STRESS AND THE LITIGATION PROCESS: HOW CAN LAWYERS MAKE MATTERS BETTER?

November 19, 2014 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

There is a very useful article in the Solicitors Journal on stress and litigation (to avoid hyperbole I will not use the word “brilliant” but it deserves it.)  Hugh Koch analyse the sources of stress for litigants.  This made me…

← Previous 1 … 10 11

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

  • PROVING THINGS 292: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR COSTS: NO “HUMAN SOURCE” FOR THE MATERIAL PROVIDED: THE IMPORTANCE OF GIVING THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
  • THE KEY CASES IN FATAL ACCIDENT DAMAGES 2026: WEBINAR ON THE 24th JUNE 2026
  • GETTING TO GRIPS WITH TIME ESTIMATES: THE KEY POINTS AND SOME USEFUL POINTERS AND CHECKLISTS: AVOIDING YOUR ESTIMATE BEING CALLED “ABSURD”
  • COST BITES 403: JUDGMENT TODAY: SUCCESS FEE AND ATE PREMIUM NOT PAYABLE BY CLIENT WHEN THE SOLICITOR FAILED TO MAKE REASONABLE ENQUIRIES ABOUT BTE INSURANCE
  • THE VEXED ISSUE OF TIME ESTIMATES (AND VOLUMINOUS BUNDLES) AGAIN: IF YOU ARE GOING TO “JUMP THE QUEUE” THEN THERE IS A DUTY ON BOTH PARTIES TO PRESENT A CASE THAT CAN BE HEARD IN THE TIME GIVEN

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.