Authors

Stephanie High

Senior Associate

Read More

Kate Hamblin

Associate

Read More
Authors

Stephanie High

Senior Associate

Read More

Kate Hamblin

Associate

Read More

14 February 2023

Disputes Quick Read – 22 of 87 Insights

Disputes Quick Read: further guidance on witness statement preparation rules

  • Briefing

The recent case of Cumbria Zoo Company Limited v The Zoo Investment Company Limited provides further guidance on the court's approach to non-compliant witness statements in the Business and Property Courts under the not-so-new Practice Direction 57AC (the PD) which we have previously written about here.

This decision concerned a witness statement which was found to be "gross[ly] non-compliant" with the PD, "littered" with comments of belief based on unattributed hearsay, as well as argument and expressions of belief.

Although the Judge reiterated previous cautions from the Court about parties needing to take a proportionate approach to non-compliance given the "substantial and flagrant" breaches of the PD, he noted that had this issue come before the Court at the earlier pre-trial review stage of proceedings, the statement would have been struck out and the Court would have considered whether to allow a replacement compliant statement.

The Judge also warned that non-compliance with the PD risked undermining the credibility of the witness and the case of the party calling the witness. Further, he noted the costs consequences for failing to comply with the PD –if a party is on the receiving end of a favourable costs order, there is little prospect of recovering the costs of the preparation of a grossly non-compliant witness statement.

Comments

This case suggests to us that the Court's patience with parties failing to comply with the PD is wearing thin. Previously the Court has been reluctant to strike out non-compliant witness statements. However, the Judge was clear that there was a significant prospect that the Defendant would have been refused permission to rely on the offending statement had this matter been raised in advance of trial.

Parties should therefore take heed that the Court will use the full range of sanctions at its disposal when considering non-compliant witness statements, and failure to follow the rules could well lead to a party being prohibited from relying on such evidence. For those on the receiving end of an offending witness statement from your opponent, be sure to raise this issue with the Court at the earliest opportunity, to ensure the Court has time to put things right, and to avoid wasting time at trial dealing with such matters.

In this series

Disputes & investigations

New SFO Director announces bold plans to tackle fraud

21 March 2024

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

What are the litigation trends for 2024?

1 February 2024

by Katie Chandler, Emma Allen

Disputes & investigations

ClientEarth v FCA: Challenging Regulator Decisions

12 February 2024

by Tim Strong, Nicole Baldev

Disputes & investigations

First of its kind judicial guidance on the use of AI in the courts

14 December 2023

Disputes & investigations

The use of AI in Trial Witness Statements post-PD 57AC

23 October 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Failure to prevent fraud – a new offence?

14 August 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Supreme Court rules that APP fraud victims cannot rely on Quincecare Duty

4 August 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: ClientEarth refused permission to pursue directors of Shell

1 June 2023

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

CJC costs review – what will change?

1 June 2023

by James Bryden, Helen Robinson

Disputes & investigations

Embargoed judgments – dos and don'ts

16 May 2023

by Stephanie High

Cryptoassets, blockchain and distributed ledger technology

Disputes Quick Read: New obligations on cryptobusinesses to report under the UK sanctions regime

9 August 2022

by Nick Maday

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: New gateway for serving Norwich Pharmacal Orders and Bankers Trust orders out of the jurisdiction

Welcome news for those pursuing fraud claims in the English Courts

28 July 2022

by Emma Allen, Samantha Brendish

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Care required when drafting SPA claim notices

23 September 2020

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Tomlin Orders – ensuring the confidentiality of settlement terms

27 April 2020

by Multiple authors

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Commercial Court's arbitral power shift

21 February 2020

by Andrew Howell

Disputes & investigations

Disputes quick read: pilot error?

13 February 2020

by Andrew Howell

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Privilege waiver warning

2 July 2020

by Tim Strong, Georgina Jones

Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read: Dealing in crypto? Be careful what you call it

7 April 2022

by Multiple authors

Call To Action Arrow Image

Latest insights in your inbox

Subscribe to newsletters on topics relevant to you.

Subscribe
Subscribe

Related Insights

Disputes & investigations

Court of Appeal confirms mandatory ADR is here to stay

4 December 2023
Quick read

by Stephanie High and Elizabeth Montpetit

Click here to find out more
Disputes & investigations

Embargoed judgments – dos and don'ts

16 May 2023
Quick read

by Stephanie High

Click here to find out more
Disputes & investigations

Disputes Quick Read - What do practitioners think about making alternative dispute resolution (ADR) compulsory?

8 March 2023
Quick read

by Elizabeth Montpetit and Stephanie High

Click here to find out more