Saha v Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine

Where evidence is likely to be of considerable significance to the trial, the court may permit a party to cross-examine the witness on the contents of a witness statement under CPR 33.4(1). The witness need not attend in person where personal attendance would be unreasonable because of professional or caring responsibilities. Time differences and practical difficulties do not necessarily prevent evidence being given by video link under CPR 32.3. The court may impose responsibility on the party obtaining permission to make the necessary arrangements.

This was an interim case management decision in a claim by Mowe Saha against Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine. The defendant gave notice of its intention to rely on a witness statement from Dr Yoshida, who was resident in Japan. The claimant disputed his evidence and sought permission to cross-examine him, together with permission for him to give evidence by video link. The court considered the significance of the evidence and the practical obstacles to attendance at trial.

1. The claimant’s email was treated, despite not stating the applications expressly, as an application under CPR 33.4(1) for permission to call Dr Yoshida for cross-examination on his witness statement. It was also treated as an application under CPR 32.3 for him to give evidence by video link.
2. Although the court had limited information at the case management stage, Dr Yoshida’s evidence was likely to be of considerable significance. He was a fellow member of Dr Soldati’s research team and had first-hand experience of the claimant’s conduct and that of Dr Soldati over a significant period. That importance justified permission for cross-examination at trial.
3. It would be unreasonable, given Dr Yoshida’s caring and professional responsibilities in Japan, to expect him to attend the trial in person. Those responsibilities, and the time differences involved, were not sufficient obstacles to the use of a video link.
4. Permission was therefore granted under CPR 33.4(1) for the claimant to call Dr Yoshida for cross-examination, with the cross-examination to be conducted by video link pursuant to CPR 32.3. The claimant was responsible for making the necessary arrangements.