Reserve the right to call a witness

RosieJoe

Just wondering why a Judge would reserve the right for a Barrister to call a witness? And anytime this witness was called again the Judge noted the fact they were being called and still did not allow it, any reasons why (other than the Judge's discretion)

Reloc8

Barristers don't call witnesses. The clients in a given case decide what witnesses they wish to have called. It is impossible to comment on individual rulings made in the course of specific proceedings.

RosieJoe

Coler wrote: »

Barristers don't call witnesses. The clients in a given case decide what witnesses they wish to have called. It is impossible to comment on individual rulings made in the course of specific proceedings.

Witness is summoned and attends court. Barrister calls for witness during the case itself, it is at this stage that the judge decides not to allow the witness give evidence. Is this because the Judge thinks there is no value to the witnesses testimony? Or as you said, is it just the judge decision on the day.

Reloc8

RosieJoe wrote: »

Witness is summoned and attends court. Barrister calls for witness during the case itself, it is at this stage that the judge decides not to allow the witness give evidence. Is this because the Judge thinks there is no value to the witnesses testimony? Or as you said, is it just the judge decision on the day.

Honestly it is impossible to know why a judge would rule a witness'testimony inadmissible without seeing the argument on the issue. Usually it comes down to the judge asking what the proposed testimony involves and a ruling by the judge that it is irrelevant to the issues at hand (in order to be admissible, evidence must first above all else be relevant).

RosieJoe

Coler wrote: »

Honestly it is impossible to know why a judge would rule a witness'testimony inadmissible without seeing the argument on the issue. Usually it comes down to the judge asking what the proposed testimony involves and a ruling by the judge that it is irrelevant to the issues at hand (in order to be admissible, evidence must first above all else be relevant).

Thanks for that, just thought it strange.

As you probably guessed I was the witness and I was summoned by both the Plaintif and the Defence, making me a key witness. Plaintif was called first to give evidence and when I was called the judge said that he reserved the right to call me as witness and then asked to hear the defence's evidence next. When I was called to give evidence (by the Plaintif's barrister) the judge again said no. He then permitted other witnesses to give evidence even though I would have been more key to the case.

Felt a bit unloved

Reloc8

No prob.

Don't take it personally at all. Fair play to you for making yourself available to testify.

Tom Young

RosieJoe wrote: »

Felt a bit unloved

This is the first time in my life I have said this; It is better sometimes never to be in the box.

Tom