EXPERT REPORTS SHOULD BE EXCHANGED CONCURRENTLY: THE PRINCIPLES APPLIED IN A CAR HIRE CASE: WHEN EVIDENCE CAN AMOUNT TO A SKELETON ARGUMENT
The decision of District Judge Glen in Kansal -v- Tang (31st January 2017, County Court at Slough) is available on the DWF website. It says a lot about “expert” evidence about hire rates. In particular the judge’s comment that evidence in rebuttal can amount to a “quasi-skeleton argument”.
The court gave directions in a small claims track on a trial in relation to repair costs and car hire costs. Those directions provided for the mutual exchange of basic hire rates evidence. The claimant made an application to vary the direction to provide for sequential exchange – the defendant’s evidence to be filed first, followed by rebuttal evidence from the claimant. The issues related to the Basic Hire Rate (BHR) and credit hire rate (CHR). The judge rejected the claimant’s application, holding that evidence should be exchanged simultaneously.