Report comment

I agree with "anonymous" below.
Frankly, the problem is solved if courts are much harsher in penalising (in costs) those who offend with prolix and irrelevant statements.
It's not rocket science confining a statement to facts (even referring to dcouments) without reciting every single thing.
Any statement should be the client's story - beginning, middle, end -
one thing that might work though - i read it this morning in the western australia bar guide which had been linked by gordon exall - is sort out disclosure and trial bundles first, and then do witness statements - witness statements then only need to refer to particular page in trial bundle for particular point.