Samson v Ali [2012] EWHC 4146 (QB) (21 November 2012)

Samson v Ali [2012] EWHC 4146 (QB) (21 November 2012)

Mr. Simm's evidence, whether regarded as expert or factual, is relevant and potentially helpful to the court in assessing the surveillance evidence central to the case. Criticisms regarding qualification and bias go to weight, not admissibility. The application to admit the evidence is allowed.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 4146
Parties
Applicant: Marlene Samson; Respondent: Mohammed Ali
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Rely on Evidence
Outcome
Application allowed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Surveillance Evidence, Bias, Civil Evidence Act 1972, Human Rights Article 8

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marlene Samson

Applicant

Mohammed Ali

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Damages / Interlocutory Application for Permission to Rely on Evidence

  1. 1 Whether Mr. Simm's evidence should be admitted as expert or factual evidence
  2. 2 Whether Mr. Simm is qualified as an expert
  3. 3 Whether the evidence is relevant and helpful to the court

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. Simm's evidence, whether regarded as expert or factual, is relevant and potentially helpful to the court in assessing the surveillance evidence central to the case. Criticisms regarding qualification and bias go to weight, not admissibility. The application to admit the evidence is allowed.

Court Disposition

Application allowed

Orders

  • Permission granted for claimant to rely on Mr. Simm's evidence at trial