Cross-examining experts is possibly one of the most daunting aspects of advocacy. If an advocate gets into a “debate” with an expert then the advocate normally loses. If the advocate is too brutal the cross-examination can backfire, too supine and…
© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2019. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission from this blog's author is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Gordon Exall and Civil Litigation Brief with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
- SIGNATURES, ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES AND STATEMENTS OF TRUTH: A BRIEF REFRESHER
- TRYING TO SERVE A SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT’S REPORT: WHEN DO THE DENTON PRINCIPLES APPLY?
- BECOME ONE OF THE GREAT (NON-ALCOHOLIC) WINE OR BEER BUFFS (AND THERE IS CHOCOLATE IN IT TOO)
- “THE COURT REFORM PROGRAMME IS MARKED BY RECKLESSNESS AND LACK OF FORESIGHT”: VIEWS FROM THE FRONT LINE: MORE RESPONSES TO THE JUSTICE COMMITTEE
- TELEPHONE HEARINGS WHEN COUNSEL WON’T ANSWER THE TELEPHONE: THE UNHAPPY LORD JUSTICE
Top Posts & Pages
- TELEPHONE HEARINGS WHEN COUNSEL WON'T ANSWER THE TELEPHONE: THE UNHAPPY LORD JUSTICE
- WHY THE LYING LITIGANT SHOULD FRET: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION ON CONTEMPT: WHEN FACEBOOK FLATLY CONTRADICTS PART 18 REPLIES
- TALES FROM THE APIL CONFERENCE 4: TIME ESTIMATES FOR HEARINGS (AND WHY YOU SHOULD VISIT KINGSTON UPON HULL)
- CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 44: JUST DON'T WRITE RUDE THINGS : LANGUAGE THAT IS "FAR REMOVED FROM THE PROFESSIONAL COURTESY THAT SOLICITORS ARE EXPECTED TO SHOW EACH OTHER"
- CLOSING COURTS: MORE MADNESS AND MAYHEM FROM HMCTS: CLOSING MORE COURTS & NO PROPER RESEARCH (BUT THEY'VE PAID £30 MILLION TO "CONSULTANTS" SO EVERYTHING WILL BE FINE