Practical knowledge.
No charge.

Your witness statement is often the first substantial thing a judge reads about you. Before the hearing, before any oral evidence — the statement forms their initial impression. Most litigants in person undermine themselves at this stage, not through dishonesty, but through poor structure, irrelevant detail, and a failure to understand what a witness statement is actually for.

A witness statement is a formal written document containing the evidence you would give orally in court if called as a witness. It is governed by CPR Part 22 and Practice Direction 22. It must be signed with a statement of truth.

It is not an opportunity to argue your case, express your feelings about the other party, or summarise legal submissions. That is what a skeleton argument or position statement is for. Confusing these documents is one of the most common mistakes litigants in person make — and judges notice immediately.

• Introduction: Who you are, your relationship to the proceedings, and the purpose of the statement. Keep it to 2–3 sentences.
• Chronological narrative: What happened, in the order it happened. Dates matter. Reference documents in the bundle ("I refer to the email dated 3 March 2023, exhibit EP1").
• Specific disputed issues: Address each factual dispute directly. Don't avoid the hard questions — if the other side alleges something, you must respond to it factually.
• Statement of truth: "I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth."

1. Writing in the third person or formal legal language. Your statement should sound like you. Judges prefer plain English. "I met Mr Smith on 5 January" is better than "The Defendant attended a meeting with the Claimant on the aforementioned date."

2. Including opinion and argument. "He was clearly lying" is opinion. "He told me X on Tuesday but told my colleague Y on Wednesday" is evidence. Stick to evidence.

3. Not exhibiting documents properly. Every document you refer to must be exhibited — labelled sequentially (EP1, EP2, EP3) and attached in order. Referring to documents you haven't exhibited wastes the judge's time and damages your credibility.

4. Being too long. Length is not strength. A focused 8-page statement is almost always more persuasive than a sprawling 30-page one. Cut ruthlessly.

5. Missing the statement of truth. Without it, the statement cannot be used as evidence. This is an elementary error that is surprisingly common.

The most common feedback I hear from litigants in person after their first hearing is: "I wasn't ready for how fast it all moved." Judges run tight lists. There is no time for you to find your papers, remember the right form of address, or gather your thoughts. Preparation is the only thing that slows it down.

Know your case cold. Not just the broad strokes — know the specific paragraphs of your witness statement that deal with each disputed issue. Know the page numbers in your bundle. Know which three points you must make, regardless of what else happens.

Prepare a one-page note — not a script, but a structured aide-memoire. Your key facts. Your key documents. The outcome you are asking for, stated precisely. The legal basis for that outcome if you know it.

• District Judge or Deputy District Judge: "Sir" or "Madam"
• Circuit Judge: "Your Honour"
• High Court Judge: "My Lord" or "My Lady"
• When in doubt, "Judge" is always acceptable and never wrong

Do not say "Your Worship" (that's magistrates) or "Your Grace" (that's archbishops). These mistakes are more common than you'd think.

Most civil and family hearings follow a predictable structure: introductions and confirmation of parties, any preliminary matters, claimant/applicant presents their case, defendant/respondent responds, judge asks questions, submissions on costs if relevant, judgment or directions.

As a litigant in person, you are not expected to know procedure as well as a barrister. Judges do make allowances. But you must not mistake that allowance for permission to be disorganised. The allowance extends to procedure — not to being unprepared on your own facts.

Cross-examination is the art of asking questions — not making speeches. Each question should be short and closed where possible. You are trying to establish facts that support your case or undermine theirs. You are not trying to win an argument in the moment.

The golden rule: Never ask a question you don't already know the answer to. If you don't know what the witness will say, you don't ask. Questions that backfire in cross-examination are worse than no questions at all.

You will be nervous. Accept it. The adrenaline is useful if you channel it into focus rather than panic. Breathe slowly. Speak more slowly than feels natural — nerves accelerate speech and judges need to take notes. Pause before answering difficult questions. There is no rule against thinking.

I built a 25-year business. Litigation destroyed it. Not because I lost — but because of the two years it took to reach the point where losing became impossible for the other side. The cost of winning can be higher than the cost of settling. Understanding that distinction is the most important strategic decision you will make.

People tend to calculate the cost of litigation in legal fees. That is the smallest part. The real cost is time, energy, focus, stress, relationships, sleep, and the opportunity cost of everything else you could have done with those resources.

A contested High Court trial can take two to four years from issue to judgment. Family proceedings can run for eighteen months or more. During that entire period, your case is a weight on everything else in your life. For a business owner, that weight can be fatal.

BATNA stands for Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement. It is the outcome you get if you don't settle. For most litigants, the honest BATNA is: years more of proceedings, uncertain outcome, certain cost, guaranteed stress.

Before any mediation or settlement negotiation, you must calculate your BATNA honestly. Not optimistically. If your BATNA is worse than what is being offered — take the offer. This sounds obvious. It is ignored constantly.

There are cases that must be fought. Cases where the principle matters more than the cost. Cases where the other side's position is so unreasonable that settlement would set a precedent you cannot accept. Cases where capitulating would invite further aggression.

In those cases — fight. Fight methodically, strategically, and without emotion getting ahead of your preparation. Know why you are fighting. Write it down. Come back to it when the process is grinding you down.

Arrive prepared. Know your opening position, your target settlement, and your walk-away point — the number or outcome below which you will not go. These three figures must be calculated before the day, not during it.

Don't start at your target. Start at a position that gives you room to move while signalling that you are serious. Extreme opening positions waste time and damage credibility. Measured, well-reasoned positions command respect.

The mediator is not a judge. They cannot impose anything. Their job is to help both parties reach a settlement that both can live with. Use them. Tell them things you wouldn't tell the other side. The good ones are remarkably useful.