Factual evidence

The evidence placed before the court, and on which it will make its determination, will generally comprise of:

  1. the parties' documents identified during the disclosure process—see: Disclosure—overview

  2. the parties' factual evidence presented by way of witness statements and those witness' oral testimony—see below

  3. the parties' expert evidence (where such specialist evidence is required and the court's permission obtained)—see: Expert evidence—overview

This topic looks at the factual witness evidence and focuses on factual witness evidence for use at trial (as opposed to factual witness evidence for use before trial).

Given the likely importance of factual evidence to the outcome of the case, practitioners should pay careful attention, and at an early stage, to the way in which their client's witness evidence is to be prepared and put before the court.

For general information and guidance on witness statements and factual evidence and some of the key issues practitioners should bear in mind, see:

  1. Practice Notes:

    1. Evidence—status, use and admissibility of witness statements and proving other factual matters—which provides guidance on the status of witness statements and draft witness statements, including when

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest PI & Clinical Negligence News

The Law Society’s AI strategy and response to government

The Law Society has responded to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology’s call for evidence on the AI Growth Lab, stressing the need for a proportionate regulatory approach that supports innovation while maintaining professional standards. In a press release dated 6 January 2026, the sector’s widespread willingness to embrace lawtech was highlighted, with two-thirds of lawyers said to ‘already use AI tools in their work’, alongside an ongoing uncertainty as to the risks and ‘exact requirements for data security, oversight and liability’. Separately, The Law Society’s ‘Introduction to lawtech’ guide published on 29 December 2025 observed that client demand for ‘greater efficiency, transparency and cost control, especially in corporate legal services’ has been a key driver for AI usage, with larger firms leading adoption and medium-sized firms catching up. The Law Society says it will continue to work with the government to ensure AI benefits both firms and clients, with its strategy focused on the following three key outcomes: i) innovation in legal service delivery; ii) an effective AI regulatory landscape, influenced by the legal sector; and iii) integrity through responsible AI use, supporting the rule of law and access to justice. Links to consultation responses and downloadable submissions on a range of AI-related issues, including data processing, ransomware resilience and the use of AI outputs in criminal proceedings (among others), are included on The Law Society’s ‘AI and lawtech: government policy and regulation’ page (updated on 18 December 2025), which also invites members to share their views and identify any gaps in support or guidance.

View PI & Clinical Negligence by content type :

Popular documents