Seeing is not always believing, says Jenny Lau
Most litigation practitioners have had the experience of receiving a witness statement that, notwithstanding a statement of truth, appears to be highly unlikely to be honest. Similarly, most practitioners have had the experience of receiving unshakeable but objectively doubtful instructions that they present in correspondence with the other side. What warnings must the practitioner give to his client, and how far will the client and the solicitor's correspondence on his behalf be protected by the privilege of witness immunity?
The age-old principle of witness immunity is one that is firmly established in English law and well known among lawyers, experts and witnesses alike. The doctrine of witness immunity itself, and the rationale behind it, appear fairly straightforward, yet this principle continues to raise interesting questions in relation to the boundaries of its application.
The English courts have recently considered two cases which questioned the limits of the witness immunity doctrine. This article looks at those cases in more detail.
The principle
Witness immunity is the privilege enjoyed by a witness and protects them from any form of civil proceedings
