Polypipe Limited v Peter Russell Davidson

Polypipe Limited v Peter Russell Davidson

Mr Wilson's witness statement, though containing intertwined factual and opinion evidence, is admissible as it falls within the permissible scope for a factual witness with relevant expertise. The court declined to strike out the statement or order disclosure of draft expert reports, finding no evidence of expert shopping and no proper jurisdictional basis for such disclosure. The trial timetable should be vacated and revised directions approved to enable both related claims to be tried together.

Parties
Claimant: Polypipe Limited; Defendant: Peter Russell Davidson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Interlocutory Applications—strike Out, Disclosure, and Case Management Directions
Outcome
Defendant's application to strike out Mr Wilson's witness statement and for disclosure refused; trial date vacated and revised directions to be approved.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Witness Statements, Case Management, Disclosure, Practice Direction 57 AC
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Expert Evidence Witness Statements Case Management Disclosure Practice Direction 57 AC

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Polypipe Limited

Claimant

Peter Russell Davidson

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Interlocutory Applications—strike Out, Disclosure, and Case Management Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the witness statement of Mr Wilson should be struck out as inadmissible opinion evidence masquerading as expert evidence
  2. 2 Whether the claimant should be ordered to disclose draft expert reports and related material from Mr Wilson
  3. 3 Whether the trial timetable should be vacated and new directions given

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Wilson's witness statement, though containing intertwined factual and opinion evidence, is admissible as it falls within the permissible scope for a factual witness with relevant expertise. The court declined to strike out the statement or order disclosure of draft expert reports, finding no evidence of expert shopping and no proper jurisdictional basis for such disclosure. The trial timetable should be vacated and revised directions approved to enable both related claims to be tried together.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application to strike out Mr Wilson's witness statement and for disclosure refused; trial date vacated and revised directions to be approved.

Orders

  • Mr Wilson's witness statement is not struck out and will stand as evidence, subject to weight at trial.
  • No order for disclosure of draft expert reports or related material from Mr Wilson.