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
