header-logo header-logo

25 November 2022 / Theo Huckle KC
Issue: 8004 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Piecing together the puzzle

101335
How to tell who is telling the truth? Theo Huckle KC sets out some valuable guidance from the courts on assessing a witness’s honesty
  • In Muyepa v Ministry of Defence, Mr Justice Cotter dismissed a personal injury claim on the basis of fundamental dishonesty on the part of the claimant, and set out a useful step-by-step guide to analysing veracity.

Last year I wrote an article (blogged on my website (www.theohucklekc.com/blog)) about the Gestmin line of cases and the new practice direction (PD 57A) concerning certification of trial witness statements and extended statements of truth, and their implications for the proper judicial approach to assessing the credibility and veracity of witnesses.

Now, on his way to dismissing a personal injury claim on the basis that it was fundamentally dishonest, Mr Justice Cotter reconsidered this matter in detail in Muyepa v Ministry of Defence [2022] EWHC 2648 (KB), [2022] All ER (D) 71 (Oct) and provided a very helpful review of the issue of assessing lay evidence.

What

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll