WHEN TWO EXPERTS ARE BETTER THAN ONE: IT MAY BE MORE ART THAN SCIENCE…
Many of the reported cases in relation to the courts and witness experts are about the judge restricting the use of experts. In Borro Ltd & Ors v Aitken  EWHC 1902 (Ch) HHJ Johns QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) found that separate experts were needed in relating to the valuation of art work.
I am informed that, subsequent to this hearing, the claimant discontinued the action.
“The valuation of the sculptures looks set to be a difficult exercise and/or one with a very significant range of opinion. I would not expect a person also instructed on the basis of their expertise in valuing paintings to be able to give the Court the best help with that exercise. Indeed, an order directing one expert would run the risk of tempting an expert outside his or her area of expertise”
The claimant brought an action alleging breach of duty on the part of the defendant in allowing loans to be given based on security provided of property and art work. The art work consisted of paintings and statues. It was common ground that expert evidence was required. The issue related to whether two experts were needed to value the art work.