Scriven v Scriven [2014] EWHC 186 (Ch) (31 January 2014)

Scriven v Scriven [2014] EWHC 186 (Ch) (31 January 2014)

The court admitted the new witness statement, finding that a significant part of it was justified as responsive to the defendants' procedural steps, that some additional material could have been introduced by supplementary questions, and that its admission would not cause significant disruption or prejudice given the scale and nature of the case. The court also considered the family context and the need to avoid a sense of injustice by excluding relevant evidence.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 186 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Edward Scriven; First Defendant: Lee Scriven; Second Defendant: Danny Scriven; Third Defendant: Gary Winston; Fourth Defendant: Evans Mockler; Fifth Defendant: Highstone Directors Limited; Sixth Defendant: London Tombs Limited (In Administration)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application During Trial
Outcome
Application to admit further witness statement granted
Legal Topics
Admission of Evidence, Case Management, Witness Statements, Disclosure
Civil Procedure Admission of Evidence Case Management Witness Statements 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Scriven

Claimant

Lee Scriven

First Defendant

Danny Scriven

Second Defendant

Gary Winston

Third Defendant

Evans Mockler

Fourth Defendant

Highstone Directors Limited

Fifth Defendant

London Tombs Limited (In Administration)

Sixth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to admit a further witness statement and exhibits from the claimant during trial
  2. 2 Whether the new evidence causes unfair prejudice or procedural disadvantage to the defendants

Ratio Decidendi

The court admitted the new witness statement, finding that a significant part of it was justified as responsive to the defendants' procedural steps, that some additional material could have been introduced by supplementary questions, and that its admission would not cause significant disruption or prejudice given the scale and nature of the case. The court also considered the family context and the need to avoid a sense of injustice by excluding relevant evidence.

Court Disposition

Application to admit further witness statement granted

Orders

  • The claimant's further witness statement (with specified paragraphs removed) and exhibits are admitted into evidence.
  • The defendants are permitted to cross-examine the claimant on the new material.