Civil Litigation Brief
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Copyright
  • Advertising Policy
  • Legal Disclaimer
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers, Leeds, Manchester & Birmingham. 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, London.
Browse: Home » credibility of experts
"IT IS NOT FOR AN EXPERT TO DISREGARD THE INSTRUCTIONS THEY HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE COURT AND THE PARTY INSTRUCTING THEM AND TO THEREBY WHOLE SCALE IGNORE EVIDENCE WHICH DOES NOT SUPPORT THEIR OPINION" (ANOTHER CASE ON EXPERTS...)

“IT IS NOT FOR AN EXPERT TO DISREGARD THE INSTRUCTIONS THEY HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE COURT AND THE PARTY INSTRUCTING THEM AND TO THEREBY WHOLE SCALE IGNORE EVIDENCE WHICH DOES NOT SUPPORT THEIR OPINION” (ANOTHER CASE ON EXPERTS…)

June 15, 2022 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts

We have another example of expert witnesses being criticised by the court in the judgment of HHJ Claire Jackson in Davies-Gilbert v Goacher [2022] EWHC 969 (Ch).   “it is not for an expert to disregard the instructions they have…

EXPERTS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE DUTY OF DISCLOSURE: A REVIEW OF THE RULES AND CASES: HOW EXPERTS CAN AVOID HITTING THE NET

EXPERTS, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE DUTY OF DISCLOSURE: A REVIEW OF THE RULES AND CASES: HOW EXPERTS CAN AVOID HITTING THE NET

April 8, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts

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…

A "LACK OF OBJECTIVITY" IN AN EXPERT'S APPROACH: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND CAUSATION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

A “LACK OF OBJECTIVITY” IN AN EXPERT’S APPROACH: CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE AND CAUSATION CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT

October 30, 2020 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts

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…

COVID REPEATS 39: THE DANGERS OF OBTAINING ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PROBLEM THAT CANNOT BE GARAGED

COVID REPEATS 39: THE DANGERS OF OBTAINING ONE-SIDED WITNESS STATEMENTS: A PROBLEM THAT CANNOT BE GARAGED

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Witness statements

This week we are looking at past posts and cases on witness statements and witness evidence. This is an area with no shortage of cases to choose from. I have made the point, many times, that witness statements are basically…

THE COVERT RECORDING OF AN EXPERT'S EXAMINATION - THE SEQUEL: DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO OBTAIN NEW EXPERT

THE COVERT RECORDING OF AN EXPERT’S EXAMINATION – THE SEQUEL: DEFENDANT GIVEN PERMISSION TO OBTAIN NEW EXPERT

May 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Arbitration,, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts

In October last year I wrote about the case of Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB).  The claimant recorded her consultation with the defendant’s medical expert and was given permission to produce these in evidence.  That case has…

EXPERT WITNESS INDEPENDENCE AND IMPARTIALITY: HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH THE "BOMBASTIC BULLSHITTER"? A CHECKLIST TO ENSURE EXPERT IMPARTIALITY

EXPERT WITNESS INDEPENDENCE AND IMPARTIALITY: HOW DO YOU DEAL WITH THE “BOMBASTIC BULLSHITTER”? A CHECKLIST TO ENSURE EXPERT IMPARTIALITY

January 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts

I am grateful to Professor Penny Cooper for sending me a copy of the report she authored with Dr Michelle Mattison for the Expert Witness Institute – “Towards Expert Witness Independence and Impartiality”.  This post is just a snapshot, to…

EXPERTS AS ADVOCATES FOR THE CLAIMANTS' CAUSE: WITNESSES WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS VERY DIFFERENT TO THEIR WITNESS STATEMENTS

EXPERTS AS ADVOCATES FOR THE CLAIMANTS’ CAUSE: WITNESSES WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS VERY DIFFERENT TO THEIR WITNESS STATEMENTS

May 21, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Witness statements

I am grateful to Dominic Regan for sending me a copy of the judgment  of Mrs Justice Andrews today in Gee -v- Depuy International Ltd [2018] EWHC 1208. The judgment is 762 paragraphs long and will be widely read by…

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 1: A STRUCTURED APPROACH: DEMEANOUR NOT DETERMINATIVE

WITNESS CREDIBILITY 1: A STRUCTURED APPROACH: DEMEANOUR NOT DETERMINATIVE

March 1, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Witness statements

This blog has looked at issues relating to witness credibility on many occasions.  Here we look at a decision by the Upper Tribunal in  KB & AH (credibility-structured approach : Pakistan) [2017] UKUT 491 (IAC). This is of general interest.  Issues…

WHEN ONE EXPERT TELLS THE OTHER EXPERT TO "GO BACK TO SCHOOL":  CASES ON CONDUCT AND THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

WHEN ONE EXPERT TELLS THE OTHER EXPERT TO “GO BACK TO SCHOOL”: CASES ON CONDUCT AND THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

September 17, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts

The case of Hatfield -v- Drax Power Ltd (18/08/2017)*   highlights some of the issues that arise in the meeting of experts.  The meeting is an important stage in many types of action, however the case law and rules relating to it…

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2023. 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

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 31,390 other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 30th MARCH 2023
  • MAKE UNJUSTIFIED ALLEGATIONS IN A LETTER OF CLAIM AT YOUR PERIL – YOU CAN PAY THE COSTS: ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS
  • AGREEING EXTENSIONS OF TIME FOR SERVICE: THE ESSENTIAL POINT THAT THEY MUST BE IN WRITING
  • APRIL 5th IS AN IMPORTANT DATE: WHAT IS MEANT BY “ISSUED” IN THE CONTEXT OF CHANGES TO QOCS?
  • A LITIGANT CAN “APPEAR” AT A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK HEARING BY THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

Top Posts & Pages

  • MAKE UNJUSTIFIED ALLEGATIONS IN A LETTER OF CLAIM AT YOUR PERIL - YOU CAN PAY THE COSTS: ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS
  • AGREEING EXTENSIONS OF TIME FOR SERVICE: THE ESSENTIAL POINT THAT THEY MUST BE IN WRITING
  • APRIL 5th IS AN IMPORTANT DATE: WHAT IS MEANT BY "ISSUED" IN THE CONTEXT OF CHANGES TO QOCS?
  • WHAT TO DO IF THE DEFENDANT MAKES AN EARLY PART 36 OFFER: WEBINAR 30th MARCH 2023
  • A LITIGANT CAN "APPEAR" AT A SMALL CLAIMS TRACK HEARING BY THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE: COURT OF APPEAL DECISION

Blogroll

  • Coronavirus: Guidance for lawyers and businesses
  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 14th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • Website of 4 – 5 Gray's Inn Square
  • Website of 4-5 Gray's Inn Square, Catastrophic Injury Group
  • www.Bailii.org

Archives

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy

Copyright © 2023 Civil Litigation Brief

Powered by WordPress and Origin