EXPERTS GOING WRONG – AGAIN : THIS TIME IT HAS COST (SOMEONE) £225,000: THE WORK TURNS INTO DUST
It is rare for me to write about judgments from secondary sources. However the judgment of Senior Master Fontaine in Patricia Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Limited [2022] EWHC 479 (QB) is noted in two reliable sources and it is a case…
PUTTING A CAP ON THE COSTS OF A SINGLE JOINT EXPERT: AN UNHAPPY TALE WITH LESSONS TO BE LEARNT
For the second time today I am writing about a case concerning a jointly instructed expert. In Loggie v Loggie [2022] EWFC 2 Mr Justice Mostyn had to determine who should pay the costs of an expert whose final costs…
NO DUTY OF CARE OWED BY A JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT (ON THE FACTS OF THIS CASE): EXPERTS GIVING EVIDENCE ABOUT BEING EXPERTS: MUCH TO READ HERE
The judgment of Mrs Justice Lambert in Radia v Marks [2022] EWHC 145 (QB) is essential reading for anyone who instructs experts in litigation. It is also essential reading for experts. The judge dismissed a claim in negligence against a…
DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS, STRIDENT LANGUAGE AND THE PART 35 DUTY OWED TO THE COURT: JUDGE ISSUES REMINDER
The previous post looked at the rejection of allegations of fundamental dishonesty in Palmer v Mantas & Anor [2022] EWHC 90 (QB). That judgment also contains some observations in relation to several of the medical experts called on behalf of the…
WHEN A CLAIMANT APPEARS AS THEIR OWN EXPERT WITNESS: IT RARELY ENDS WELL
In Tehrani v Hamilton Bonaduz AG & Ors [2021] EWHC 3457 (IPEC) HHJ Hacon considered a case where a claimant appeared as their own expert witness. THE CASE The claimant, a professor, brought an action asserting that the defendant…
EXPERT HAD A “FLAGRANT DISREGARD FOR HIS DUTY TO THE COURT”: ORDERED TO PAY £50,500 WASTED COSTS
NB – THE COSTS ORDER AGAINST THE EXPERT IN THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL. THE JUDGMENT ON APPEAL CAN BE FOUND HERE. The judgment of Recorder Hudson in Robinson -v- Liverpool University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Dr Chris…
WHEN YOUR CASE LARGELY RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: MAKE SURE YOUR EXPERT IS NOT VIEWED AS BEING PARTISAN
The judgment of Mrs Justice Moulder today in ECU Group PLC v HSBC Bank PLC & Ors [2021] EWHC 2875 (Comm) contains another example of the dangers of relying on expert evidence. The judge did not accept the evidence of…
EXPERT EVIDENCE – UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS AND AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 20th OCTOBER 2020
The last few months have seen a large number of cases where expert evidence has proved highly problematic (usually for the party calling the expert in question). On the 20th October 2021 I am giving a webinar “Expert Evidence -…
GRIFFITHS -V- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 3: THE CLAIMANT DID NOT HAVE A FAIR TRIAL: THE COURTS SHOULD NOT ALLOW LITIGATION BY AMBUSH: THE DISSENTING JUDGMENT
NB THE DECISION IN THIS CASE WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT. THE SUPREME COURT ESSENTIALLY AGREEING WITH THE DISSENTING JUDGMENT OF BEAN LJ CONSIDERED IN THIS POST. THE SUPREME COURT DECISION IS DISCUSSED HERE. This is the third post…
GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL: AN EXPERT’S REPORT WITHOUT REASONING IS “ALL BUT WORTHLESS”
NB THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT – SEE THE DECISION HERE. This is the second post about the Court of Appeal decision in Griffiths v Tui (UK) Ltd [2021] EWCA Civ 1442. Here we…
GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (1): JUDGES AND EXPERTS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP
NB THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN GRIFFITHS WAS OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT, SEE THE DISCUSSION HERE. This is the first of a series of posts that consider the Court of Appeal judgment in Griffiths v Tui (UK) Ltd…
NO MATTER HOW BIG YOU ARE, OR HOW IMPORTANT (YOU THINK) YOU ARE – YOU HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES: SECRETARY OF STATE REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE
In Good Law Project Ltd, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2021] EWHC 2595 (TCC) Mr Justice Fraser issued a clear and stark warning that expert evidence has to comply with the…
EXPERTS GIVING EVIDENCE IS “NOT A GAME”: £1.4 MILLION VALUATION FOUND TO BE £3,230
Another interesting part of the judgment of ICC Judge Barber in CSB 123 Ltd, Re [2021] EWHC 2506 (Ch) is the judge’s findings in relation to the expert evidence. It is rare for a judge to state to an expert witness…
PROVING THINGS 216: THE DANGERS OF RELYING ON EXPERT REPORT TO PROVE VALUE
There are some similarities between the case of Serene Construction Ltd v Salata and Associates Ltd & Ors [2021] EWHC 2433 (Ch) and the previous post in this series. In both cases the claimant’s case related to the valuation of…
PROVING THINGS 215: CLAIM £8.7 MILLION IN DAMAGES BUT RECOVER NOTHING: NOT SO MUCH A CASE OF EXPERT SHOPPING BUT EXPERTS ON SHOPPING CENTRES
We have looked before at the judgment of HHJ Hodge (sitting as a High Court judge) in Ahuja Investments Ltd v Victorygame Ltd & Anor (CONTRACT – Purchase of commercial investment property) [2021] EWHC 2382 (Ch). It is worth noting that…
ATTEMPT TO INTRODUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: EVIDENCE NOT ADMISSIBLE AND APPLICATION MADE FAR TOO LATE
In Fraine v Foy [2021] EWHC 2302 (Ch) Master Clark refused an application to rely on expert evidence that was served the day before the hearing. The expert evidence was not relevant, not admissible and the application made far too…
A JOINT STATEMENT OF EXPERTS IS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COURT AND NOT A PROVING GROUND FOR THE PARTIES’ RESPECTIVE CASES: “OVERLAWYERED” REPORTS: LIMITATION AND DATE OF KNOWLEDGE:
In the judgment today in Aderounmu v Colvin [2021 EWHC 2293 (QB) Master Cook found that the claimant was not under a disability and the limitation period for bringing a personal injury action had expired. The Master exercised the discretion…
QUESTIONS TO EXPERT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT BEFORE THE TRIAL: THE WRITING MAY BE ON THE WALL FOR LATE CHALLENGES
For the second time in two days I am reporting on cases where judges made the point that issues relating to evidence should have been raised before trial. Yesterday Mr Justice Zacaroli held that issues in relation to disclosure should…
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 [2021] EWHC 1902 (Ch) HHJ Johns QC (sitting as a High…
EXPERT EVIDENCE, NECESSARY EXPERTISE AND ADMISSIBILITY: BOP-ME, MASKS AND EXPERTISE
There is an interesting discussion of the use of expert evidence in the context of specialist proceedings in the judgment of Mr Justice Fraser in Bop-Me Ltd v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care (Rev 1) [2021] EWHC…
WHEN A PARTY WANTS TO CHANGE ITS EXPERT: PRE-ACTION REPORTS, “EXPERT SHOPPING” AND CANDOUR
In the judgment today in Rogerson (t/a Cottesmore Hotel, Golf and Country Club) v Eco Top Heat & Power Ltd [2021] EWHC 1807 (TCC) Mr Alexander Nissen QC (sitting as a Judge of the High Court) considered the circumstances in…
THE USE OF EXPERT WITNESSES TO CONSTRUE EUROPEAN DIRECTIVES AFTER BREXIT: HOW THE COURT WORKS WITH “ONE OR BOTH HANDS TIED BEHIND ITS BACK”
In Greenaway v Parrish & Ors [2021] EWHC 1506 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the “nightmare position” the courts are now in as a result of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 in relation to interpreting European Directives. This…
“THERE IS A WORRYING TREND… IN TERMS OF FAILURE BY EXPERTS GENERALLY IN LITIGATION COMPLYING WITH THEIR DUTIES”
There is an important point about a litigant’s responsibility for the conduct of their own experts (and expert’s conduct generally) in Beattie Passive Norse Ltd & Anor v Canham Consulting Ltd (No. 2 Costs) [2021] EWHC 1414 (TCC). This was…
NO NEED TO CALL CLAIMANT’S MEDICAL EXPERT IN A FAST TRACK TRIAL: MUST BE A GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM THE NORMAL PROCEDURE
I am grateful to Claire Haley from Aegis Legal for sending me a copy of the judgement of HHJ Freedman in Taylor -v- TUI UK Limited (County Court at Newcastle 22nd January 2021). The judge overturned a decision that the…
LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT”
Over the years we have seen some biting judgments about the conduct of experts in civil litigation. I struggle to recall one as extraordinary as the judgment of Mrs Justice Joanna Smith in Dana UK AXLE Ltd v Freudenberg FST…
A PERSON GIVING EVIDENCE AS TO EARNINGS AND PENSION MAY (OR MAY NOT) BE AN EXPERT: COURT CONSIDERS THE ISSUES
Returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Cavangh in TVZ & Ors v Manchester City Football Club Ltd [2021] EWHC 1179 (QB) the judge considered, but did not decide, whether statements from third parties as to earnings and pensions were…
THE APPROPRIATE STEPS WHEN A JUDGE HAS LIMITED THE SCOPE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: COMPLY WITH COURT ORDERS IF YOU WANT TO KEEP A GOOD IMAGE
Another aspect of the judgement of Master Davison in Mustard v Flower & Ors [2021] EWHC 846 (QB) was a decision in relation to expert evidence. The Master refused the claimant’s application to rely on amended medical reports. Those reports…
EXPERTS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE DUTY OF DISCLOSURE: A REVIEW OF THE RULES AND CASES: HOW EXPERTS CAN AVOID HITTING THE NET
An earlier post looked at the decision of Mr Justice Mostyn in Bux v The General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 762. Part of that judgment dealt with the duties of experts to disclose an interest they have in the case. This…
EXPERT WITNESSES & CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: HIGH COURT UPHOLDS DECISION TO ERASE DOCTOR FROM RECORD BECAUSE OF HIS CONDUCT AS AN EXPERT WITNESS
Every litigator and, particularly, every expert witness should have a very close read of the judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Bux v The General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 762. Although it is a decision in the administrative court it…
ADJOURNMENT OF A TRIAL IS A “LAST RESORT” (AND WILL RARELY OCCUR BECAUSE OF INABILITY OF SPECIFIC COUNSEL TO ATTEND)
The judgment of Mr Justice Fordham in Naylor v University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust [2021] EWHC 340 (QB) shows the difficulty of obtaining an adjournment of a trial date. The judge rejected an application on the grounds of…
SEEKING TO ADD A JOINT EXPERT INTO THE ACTION 2: A COSTLY PROCESS: INCURRING LIABILITY FOR £90,000 IN AN ATTEMPT TO RECOVER £16,000
I am grateful to my colleague Colm Nugent for giving me further details of the costs involved in the defendant’s unsuccessful application to join a joint expert into the action which was discussed in a post earlier today. Colm also…
FAILED ATTEMPT TO OBTAIN COSTS FROM A JOINT EXPERT: A LOT TO LEARN HERE
In Walker -v- TUI UK Limited (Manchester County Court 14th January 2021)* District Judge Obodai considered an application by the defendant to join a jointly instructed expert into the action as a party for the purpose of obtaining costs against…
EXPERTS NOT REALLY NECESSARY WHEN A JUDGE LOOKS AT BALLET SHOES: EVIDENCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE EN POINTE
Instructing experts in circumstances where they are not necessary, or their evidence is not admissible, is a common theme in litigation. This issue was considered by Mr David Stone (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Rothy’s Inc v…
JUDGE REFUSES TO RECONSIDER CRITICISMS OF EXPERT WITNESS IN A JUDGMENT: EXPERT DUTIES CANNOT BE DELEGATED
In Neurim Pharmaceuticals (1991) Ltd & Anor v Generics UK Ltd (t\a MYLAN) [2020] EWHC 3270 (Pat) Mr Justice Marcus Smith made some observations about the role of the expert witness and the importance of their evidence being criticised in…
EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT ADMITTED: IT WAS NOT NECESSARY AND TOO COSTLY
It must be disheartening for parties who get to trial to find that the judge does not think that the “experts” they have instructed (at great cost) are not regarded by the courts as experts at all. This is exactly…
WHY AN EXPERT WITNESS MUST EXAMINE THE OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE: WHY MEDICAL RECORDS ARE NORMALLY THE KEY
There are several short passages in the judgment of HHJ Baucher in Ali v The Home Office [2020] EW Misc 27 (CC) which emphasises the need for expert witnesses to consider the objective evidence before reporting. It also shows the…
A “LACK OF OBJECTIVITY” IN AN EXPERT’S APPROACH: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND CAUSATION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
In Leach v North East Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust [2020] EWHC 2914 (QB) HHJ Freedman (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) made some telling observations about the lack of objectivity of the defendant’s expert. THE CASE The claimant…
WHEN A LITIGANT SEEKS TO DEFEND A CLAIM AT ALL COSTS: A HIGHWAY TO HELL: WHY, IN LITIGATION, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU CAN SEE THE WOOD FOR THE TREES
The judgment of HHJ Mithani QC in Colar v Highways England Company Ltd [2019] EW Misc 17 (CC) has recently arrived on BAILLI. It provides an illustration of the danger of defending a claim “at all costs”. The judge was…
CLAIMANT IN LOW-VALUE PERSONAL INJURY CASE NOT ENTITLED TO RELY ON EXPERT REPORTS WHEN PROTOCOL NOT COMPLIED WITH: JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
In Mason -v- Laing (Bradford County Court 20th January 2020 Mason v Laing) HHJ Gosnell held that a claimant that failed to comply with the requirements as to instructing experts prior to a Stage 3 hearing could not rely on…
DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT OF THE CASE LED TO INDEMNITY COSTS BEING PAID: MAKING ALLEGATIONS OF “NOT ACTING IN GOOD” FAITH: A SPECULATIVE & WEAK CASE: EXPERTS WITH A CONFLICT OF INTEREST
This is the third (but not the last) look at the judgment on costs in Essex County Council v UBB Waste (Essex) Ltd (No. 3) [2020] EWHC 2387. The judge held that the defendant’s conduct of the case was such that…
GUIDANCE ON GIVING REMOTE EVIDENCE: ESSENTIAL READING FROM THE ACADEMY OF EXPERTS
The Academy of Experts have written Guidance on Giving Remote Evidence. Although this is aimed at expert witnesses there is much that anyone involved in litigation can take away from this. SELECTED EXTRACTS There is much that is useful. …
THE TREATMENT OF EXPERT EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: ANOTHER CASE WHERE A JUDGMENT IN FAVOUR OF A DEFENDANT IS OVERTURNED
There has been much online discussion about the impact that the decision in Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB) will have in relation to food poisoning cases and more generally. That case related specifically to the treatment of…
EXPERT EVIDENCE UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: THE TRIAL JUDGE CANNOT OVERTURN CONCLUSIONS OF A “UNCONTROVERTED” EXPERT: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY
NB THIS DECISION WAS SUBSEQUENTLY OVERTURNED BY THE COURT OF APPEAL. THE COURT OF APPEAL JUDGMENT IS CONSIDERED HERE. In Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer considered the question of the approach of…
WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE BECOMES REDUNDANT: “WE DO NOT HAVE TRIAL BY EXPERT IN THIS COUNTRY: WE HAVE TRIAL BY JUDGE”
There is an interesting judgment on expert evidence at Domeney v Rees & Ors [2020] EWHC 2115 (QB), where Master Davis considered whether accident reconstruction evidence was necessary in relation to a trial. “We do not have trial by…
CHANGES COMING INTO FORCE IN OCTOBER 1: CHANGES TO THE STATEMENTS GIVEN BY EXPERTS
The 122nd update Practice Direction Amendments come into force on the 1st October 2020. We have already looked at the changes to the rules relating to proceedings for contempt. Here we look at the change relating to the declaration that…
THE INSTRUCTION OF EXPERTS : LOOKING AT GUIDANCE FROM THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE
I have written before the useful guidance given by the Crown Prosecution Guidance on Expert Evidence. Many of the points in that guide apply, with equal force, to instructing experts in civil proceedings. It is worthwhile reading for lawyers and experts…
THE EXPERT THAT DOESN’T GIVE HIS SOURCES (EXCEPT WIKIPEDIA): A PRACTICE DEPRECATED BY THE COURT.
In Engie Fabricom (UK) Ltd v MW High Tech Projects UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 1626 (TCC) Mrs Justice O’Farrell commented on the practice of one of the experts in the case. Failure to follow the basic guidance given in the…
PROVING THINGS 177: WHEN YOU ARE RELYING ON A MEDICAL EXPERT ON CAUSATION WHO “SHOOTS FROM THE HIP” (IT DOESN’T END WELL)
I have written many times about issues arising from expert witnesses. In clinical negligence cases the role of the expert witness is often paramount. The claimant, in particular, is almost wholly reliant on expert evidence in relation to causation. It…
AN EXPERT WITH A CONFLICT OF INTEREST: SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN INSTRUCTED
I am giving a webinar on the 29th June 2020 on the Perils and Pitfalls of Expert Evidence. I have not found that there is any shortage of material. That material is added to in the judgment of Mr Justice…
LIFE EXPECTANCY IS RARELY A SIMPLE MATTER OF STATISTICS: APPLYING FOR A “VARIATION” OF DIRECTIONS: YOU SHOULD HAVE APPEALED
In the judgment this morning in Chaplin v Ben Pistol Allianz Insurance Plc [2020] EWHC 1543 (QB) Jay J rejected an application by the defendant to rely on expert evidence in relation to life expectancy. This judgment is important…
You must be logged in to post a comment.