A well respected, award winning social enterprise
Volunteer run - Government and charity funded
We help 50,000 people a year through divorce

01202 805020

Lines open: Monday to Friday 9am-5pm
Call for FREE expert advice & service info


What are we each entitled to in our divorce settlement?

What does the law say about how to split the house, how to share pensions and other assets, and how much maintenance is payable.

What steps can we take to reach a fair agreement?

The four basic steps to reaching an agreement on divorce finances are: disclosure, getting advice, negotiating and implementing a Consent Order.

What is a Consent Order and why do we need one?

A Consent Order is a legally binding document that finalises a divorcing couple's agreement on property, pensions and other assets.


Do you need help going to court over a Financial Settlement?

Our consultant service offers expert advice and support for people who are going to court over a fair financial settlement, for less than a quarter of the cost of using a traditional high street solicitor.


Evidence-in-chief

  • Vail
  • Vail's Avatar Posted by
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
14 Dec 07 #9020 by Vail
Topic started by Vail
The procedure for the Final Hearing requires amongst other stuff a statement of "evidence-in-chief" to be submitted before the main bundle.

Does anyone have an idea as to exactly what this should contain?

  • Marshy_
  • Marshy_'s Avatar
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
14 Dec 07 #9043 by Marshy_
Reply from Marshy_
Vail. 30 seconds on google "Jargon term for evidence adduced to the court during ExaminationInChief, that is, while the witness is being questioned by the party that called him, rather than during CrossExamination."

See www.kevinboone.com/lawglos_EvidenceInChief.html

F

  • Vail
  • Vail's Avatar Posted by
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
14 Dec 07 #9044 by Vail
Reply from Vail
Falk,

Thanks for that. I've been there and on other sites. It is jargon and it appears to relate to oral evidence.

What I would like to know is what exactly the evidence-in-chief for the final hearing should contain.

The bundle is to include the issues and what order the party seeks to be made, together with existing financial circumstances together with a chronology, court orders, questionnaires, supporting documentation etc - so it is all there.

This means that whatever the evidence-in-chief is, it will duplicate what's in the bundle. As the term seems to relate to oral evidence, is a statement of evidence-in-chief supposed to cover what the party is going to say at the Final Hearing?

That would seem to be the schedule of issues and the order(s) sought. Is that right?

I could of course ask a solicitor, but I have spent my money and more, so that's out of the question.

If someone has been to a FH I would be grateful to know what they included in their evidence-in-chief. It's a document supposed to be submitted ahead of the bundle.

Thanks again Falk!

  • attilladahun
  • attilladahun's Avatar
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
14 Dec 07 #9058 by attilladahun
Reply from attilladahun
The reason such directions are often made by the Court is to speed up the hearing as each witness will be sworn in to confirm the statement. The other party will then cross examine and that will be quicker as they will have their Q's ready as the witnesses evidence will have been disclosed (so people will not be taken by surprise)

One of the benefits for the Court is having the parties evidence in writing helps the DJ to prepare his judgment as he/she has the parties' evidence from which one can precis.

Another benefit is when you have to commit an argument or evidence in writing more care tends to be taken and less mistakes are made!!

  • Vail
  • Vail's Avatar Posted by
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
More
17 Dec 07 #9151 by Vail
Reply from Vail
Attila,

Thanks for the reply. If there are no witnesses other than the two parties then I presume the evidence-in-chief relates to matters in dispute and orders requested from the court?

As mentioned, I find this puzzling because all of this is already in the bundle because no evidence can be introduced which isn't already in the bundle! It seems as if the purpose of the bundle is not to be read but to be available to be referred to during the hearing.

It might be just me, but I find this odd as the bundle itself is to contain ancillary information for referral should it be necessary.

Bundling along abundantly confused by bundles,

Vailabundle

Moderators: wikivorce teamrubytuesdaydukeyhadenoughnowTetsSheziLinda SheridanForsetiMitchumWhiteRoseLostboy67WYSPECIALBubblegum11