Gregory & Anor v Moore & Ors

Gregory & Anor v Moore & Ors

Paragraph 7.21 of Mr Salenko’s witness statement and the Protocol are prima facie admissible as hearsay evidence of fact or fact and opinion. The court cannot conclude that only an expert could produce the evidence, and it would be wrong to exclude it at this interlocutory stage. The trial judge will determine the weight and reliability of the evidence.

Parties
Claimant: Phillip David Gregory; Claimant: William John Wilkins; First Defendant: Julianna Moore (Formerly known as Ganna Ziuzina); Second Defendant: Irene Hayman Pring (on her own account and as executor of the estate of Basil John Pring); Third Defendant: Shaughan Pring (as executor of the estate of Basil John Pring)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application Ruling
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Hearsay, Expert Evidence, Cell Phone Location Evidence, Forfeiture Act 1982, Disclosure
Civil Procedure Evidence Admissibility of Hearsay Expert Evidence Cell Phone Location Evidence Forfeiture Act 1982 Disclosure

Case Brief

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 14 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 (on her own account and as executor of the estate of Basil John Pring)

Second Defendant

Shaughan Pring (as executor of the estate of Basil John Pring)

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether paragraph 7.21 of Mr Salenko’s witness statement and the Protocol (Minutes of Document Review) are admissible as evidence
  2. 2 Whether the evidence constitutes inadmissible expert opinion
  3. 3 Whether the evidence should be excluded under CPR 32.1(2)

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraph 7.21 of Mr Salenko’s witness statement and the Protocol are prima facie admissible as hearsay evidence of fact or fact and opinion. The court cannot conclude that only an expert could produce the evidence, and it would be wrong to exclude it at this interlocutory stage. The trial judge will determine the weight and reliability of the evidence.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Paragraph 7.21 of Mr Salenko’s witness statement and the Protocol are admissible and will not be excluded at this stage.
  • Ms Moore’s application for principal relief is dismissed.