Hayes and others v Transco Plc: CA 17 Sep 2003

The defendant appealed awards against it of disturbance payments to the claimants under their contracts of employment. The claimants had produced documents at the last minute before the trial but it was arguable that since these documents were those of the defendants, they should heve been disclosed anyway.
Held: The evidence, however badly introduced had been admitted by agreement. However, the judge feared being unable to conclude the case, and so restricted cross-examination, and refused admission of further evidence in rebuttal. The trial suffered a serious procedural irregularity, and a retrial was ordered.


Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Waller And Lord Justice Clarke


[2003] EWCA Civ 1261




Civil Procedure Rules 52.3(b)


England and Wales


CitedDarren Watson v Chief Constable of Cleveland Police CA 2001
The Court of Appeal should only interfere with a judge’s decision to limit cross-examination if the decision is outside an acceptable range of decisions at which a judge can legitimately arrive . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 15 July 2022; Ref: scu.186257