MCOL statement

[the cyclist]

Morning folks,

I have had a bit of a google but can't seam to find any relevant info on the below scenario.

person A asks person B via email to clarify a technical point on a product , person B is an employee of the company who supplied the product,

person B answers by email an clarifies the point in question.

person A then uses that info / email and submits a witness statement to mcol naming person B as the declarant without the knowledge of person B,

person B's employer is unimpressed to say the least that that there employee has been put in this position ,

so my question is , is this bad for person A , do the courts take a dim view of this kind of behaviour,

thanks in advance

cyclist,

[GasEngineer]

the cyclist said:

Morning folks,

I have had a bit of a google but can't seam to find any relevant info on the below scenario.

person A asks person B via email to clarify a technical point on a product , person B is an employee of the company who supplied the product,

person B answers by email an clarifies the point in question.

person A then uses that info / email and submits a witness statement to mcol naming person B as the declarant without the knowledge of person B,

person B's employer is unimpressed to say the least that that there employee has been put in this position ,

so my question is , is this bad for person A , do the courts take a dim view of this kind of behaviour,

thanks in advance

cyclist,

Is person B's employer the party being claimed against?

[KungFuPanda]

A formal witness statement to be utilised in Court proceedings has to be in the proper Court format, contain a statement of truth and be signed by the witness. I presume that none of this is present in this case so how has person A managed to introduce it as evidence in a Court case?

If person A has adduced it as expert evidence, it should be CPR 35 compliant and they must have sought the Court s permission to rely on the same.

Alternatively if person A has merely attached the email as evidence or an addendum to their own witness evidence, there’s not much you can do unless the email was marked “Without Prejudice.


Have proceedings actually been issued?

[ADJimbo]

No issue whatsoever in naming Person B and producing Person B’s email as evidence and/or referring to Person B in the witness statement of Person A.

[Panamax]

the cyclist said:

person A asks person B via email to clarify a technical point on a product, person B is an employee of the company who supplied the product,

Was the question asked (a) before, or (b) after the product was purchased?

the cyclist said:

person A then uses that info / email and submits a witness statement to mcol naming person B as the declarant without the knowledge of person B,

Evidence is evidence. However, if this email was after the purchase then see the points already made by KungFuPanda above. It can be part of A's evidence but it it isn't a Witness Statement by B unless B has made it as such.

[skyebear]

If Person A has submitted a witness statement on behalf of Person B, and B had no knowledge of this, then A has been very naughty.

Presumably A did this due to stupidity rather than deception.

[the cyclist]

Thanks men,

I am the defendant , but i know the business owner.

it's simply a copy and pasted email reply that was sent from person B to A. i can't see any declaration of truth,

it looks like B has just loaded it into the expert witness box as a poor intimidation tactic, but he is stupid i will say that much

thanks again ,