Gregory & Anor v Moore & Ors [2019] EWHC 2430 (Ch) (23 September 2019)

Gregory & Anor v Moore & Ors [2019] EWHC 2430 (Ch) (23 September 2019)

The evidence in question (Mr Salenko's statement and the Protocol) is prima facie admissible as hearsay and/or factual evidence. It is not established that only an expert could have produced the analysis, and the court is not persuaded to exclude the evidence at this interlocutory stage. The weight and reliability...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2019] EWHC 2430 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Phillip David Gregory; Claimant: William John Wilkins; First Defendant: Julianna Moore (Formerly known as Ganna Ziuzina); Second Defendant: Irene Hayman Pring; Third Defendant: Shaughan Pring
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil (chancery Division) / Interlocutory Application Prior to Trial
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Hearsay, Expert Evidence, Forfeiture Act 1982, Cell Site Analysis
Civil Procedure Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Hearsay Expert Evidence Forfeiture Act 1982 Cell Site Analysis

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Phillip David Gregory

Claimant

William John Wilkins

Claimant

Julianna Moore (Formerly known as Ganna Ziuzina)

First Defendant

Irene Hayman Pring

Second Defendant

Shaughan Pring

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (chancery Division) / Interlocutory Application Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether paragraph 7.21 of Mr Salenko's witness statement and associated maps are admissible as evidence
  2. 2 Whether the 'Protocol of Documents Inspection' (the Protocol) is admissible as evidence
  3. 3 Whether the evidence in question constitutes inadmissible expert evidence or admissible hearsay/factual evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence in question (Mr Salenko's statement and the Protocol) is prima facie admissible as hearsay and/or factual evidence. It is not established that only an expert could have produced the analysis, and the court is not persuaded to exclude the evidence at this interlocutory stage. The weight and reliability of the evidence are matters for the trial judge.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Paragraph 7.21 of Mr Salenko's witness statement and the associated maps are not struck out and are admissible at trial.
  • The Protocol (Minutes of Document Review) is admissible at trial.