header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
15 April 2010 / Roddy Macleod
Issue: 7413 / Categories: Features , Professional negligence
printer mail-detail

All change?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Roddy Macleod asks the question:to sue or not to sue?

Reading about the immunity of a witness from proceedings in respect of evidence given within those proceedings may well not be a headline grabber, especially as the origins of the rule go back to 1873. But following the case of Jones v Kaney [2010] EWHC 61 (QB), [2010] All ER (D) 131 (Jan) that could all change.

History of the law

The immunity of a witness from litigation in respect of evidence given in court was described as a fundamental rule of law by Lord Justice Simon Brown in Silcott v Metropolitan Police [1996] 8 Admin LR. Back in 1873 in Dawkins v Lord Rokeby 8 QB 225 Page 265 it was said: “…no action lies against a witness upon evidence given before court….” Over the years it is clear that the court has recognised immunity also in relation to things done or omitted to be done in the course of preparing for trial.

The basis of the immunity in respect of evidence given in court was explained by Lord Halsbury in Watson v McEwen

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

NEWS
Read All
Legal notice: Notice under the Trustee Act 1925

NOTICE UNDER THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925

HERBERT SMITH STAFF PENSION SCHEME (THE “SCHEME”)

NOTICE TO CREDITORS AND BENEFICIARIES UNDER SECTION 27 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT 1925
Emergency lawyers on call as international regulatory actions soar
Law firm HFW is offering clients lawyers on call for dawn raids, sanctions issues and other regulatory emergencies
NLJ this week: Employment law’s fine margins
From gender-critical speech to notice periods and incapability dismissals, employment law continues to turn on fine distinctions. In his latest employment law brief for NLJ, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School reviews a cluster of recent decisions, led by Bailey v Stonewall, where the Court of Appeal clarified the limits of third-party liability under the Equality Act
NLJ this week: Promises broken on non-molestation orders?
Non-molestation orders are meant to be the frontline defence against domestic abuse, yet their enforcement often falls short. Writing in NLJ this week, Jeni Kavanagh, Jessica Mortimer and Oliver Kavanagh analyse why the criminalisation of breach has failed to deliver consistent protection
NLJ this week: Assisted dying under the legal microscope
Assisted dying remains one of the most fraught fault lines in English law, where compassion and criminal liability sit uncomfortably close. Writing in NLJ this week, Julie Gowland and Barny Croft of Birketts examine how acts motivated by care—booking travel, completing paperwork, or offering emotional support—can still fall within the wide reach of the Suicide Act 1961
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll