‘As you will remember, at the end of 2013 the CA refused to allow the Defendant to rely upon witness statements which had been served out of time. Therefore when the Claimant’s claim for damages for false imprisonment, assault, malicious prosecution, Breach of Article 3 and defamation came before the court in August 2014, the only statements read by the court were those provided by the Claimant, and the only live evidence came from the Claimant and one witness on her behalf. The court did, however, also view CCTV.’
Zenith PI Blog, 5th September 2014
Source: www.zenithpi.wordpress.com
