UPDATED VERSION OF THE CHANCERY GUIDE: A USEFUL LINK
The Chancery Guide was updated earlier this month. Here we look at the Practice Note and have a link to the updated Guide itself. FINDING THE LINK The Practice Note that accompanies it gives a link to the Guide itself…
EXPERT WATCH 13: WHEN THE CLAIMANT ATTEMPTED TO INTRODUCE A NEW CASE DURING CROSS-EXAMINATION OF THE DEFENDANTS’ EXPERT (HOW DO WE THINK THIS WENT?)
We are looking at a case where the claimant’s expert, belatedly, accepted that the reports he was relying on were unreliable. The claimant then attempted to introduce new matters and evidence to bolster an alternative case. The judge rejected that…
THREE WEBINARS ON EXPERTS: THE JOINT EXPERT AND MEETING OF EXPERTS; PART 35 QUESTIONS AND EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2025
The way in which the “Expert Watch” series has quickly developed shows that issues relating to expert evidence continue to give rise to problems. These three webinars explore many of the major issues in relation to experts. Dealing with the…
THE CLAIMANT WAS FUNDAMENTALLY DISHONEST: EX-SOLDIER FAILS IN HER CASE AND NOW NO LONGER HAS THE PROTECTION OF QOCS
Here we look at a case where the claimant was found to be fundamentally dishonest. The judge commented on the irony of the fact that she had a substantial claim for damages, even without that dishonesty. Nevertheless the evidence of…
EXPERT WATCH 12: “THE EXPERT EVIDENCE FOR BOTH SIDES HAD PROBLEMS”: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT
We look here at an unusual set of facts relating to the judge’s assessment of expert evidence. Firstly the judge found that the claimant’s expert had no real experience of the specific issue in question in the action; she also…
ANONYMITY AND REPORTING RESTRICTIONS IN CIVIL CASES (2): THE PROCESS THAT JUDGE’S SHOULD FOLLOW WHEN CONSIDERING THESE ISSUES
The previous post looked at the Court of Appeal decision yesterday in relation to applications for anonymity in civil cases. Here we take a close look at the factors that the courts have to consider when an application for anonymity…
ANOTHER CASE WHERE A WITNESS STATEMENT WAS SERVED BUT THE WITNESS DID NOT ATTEND TRIAL: THE DEFENDANT HAD USED PARTS OF THE STATEMENT IN CROSS EXAMINATION – WHAT WAS ITS STATUS?
We are looking at another case where a party served a witness statement and yet the witness did not attend trial, the court only being told of this at the end of the trial itself. In this case the statement…
EXPERT WATCH 11: EXPERT ASSERTS THAT THE CLAIMANT WAS MALINGERING BUT WOULDN’T TELL THE COURT ABOUT THE DETAILS OF THE TESTS THAT LED TO THAT CONCLUSION
We have seen some unusual conduct of experts on this site. However the case we look at today has elements that we have not looked at before. An expert carried out tests on the claimant and, as a result of…
PROVING THINGS 268: LAW FIRM DEFENDANT FAILS TO ADDUCE EVIDENCE TO PROVE ITS ASSERTIONS – IT WAS BOUND BY ITS OWN “BAD BARGAIN”
Here we have an interesting dispute between two firms of lawyers. The claimant sued the defendant under a contractual agreement following the transfer of files. What is particularly interesting here is the judge’s observations on the lack of evidence brought…
COST BITES 272: CLAIMANTS ORDERED TO PAY SOME OF A DEFENDANT’S COSTS IMMEDIATELY, PRIOR TO JUDGMENT BECAUSE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THE TRIAL WAS CONDUCTED
Last week we had a judge discussing the “pay as you go” principle in litigation. Here we have a slight extension of that principle with the judge deciding that the claimants’ conduct of the the trial meant that they should…
EXPERT WATCH 10: CLAIMANT UNSUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL IN ATTEMPTING TO OVERTURN THE TRIAL JUDGE’S PREFERENCE FOR THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: “THE IRREDUCIBLE FACT IS IS THAT THE JUDGE ACCEPTED THE EXPERT EVIDENCE OF THE RESPONDENT’S KEY WITNESS AND PREFERRED TO OVER THE EVIDENCE OF THE APPELLANT’S KEY EXPERT WITNESS”
There are relatively few cases where a party appeals on the basis that trial judge was wrong to accept the evidence of one party’s expert witness in preference to the other. There are even fewer cases where such an appeal…
ABSENT WITNESSES AND ADVERSE INFERENCES (AGAIN): WE DON’T WANT TO PAY YOU THE US$1,911,877,385 YOU ARE CLAIMING: BUT WE WON’T GIVE EVIDENCE
We are continuing with looking at the consequences of a party failing to call witnesses, or, as in this case, give no evidence of fact at all. In this case the judge had no difficulty in stating his views as…
CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CORNER 3: ABSENT DOCTORS AND ADVERSE INFERENCES (SOMETHING TO CONSIDER FOR ALL LITIGATORS HERE…)
Today we are looking at a case where the judge considered whether adverse inferences should be drawn when a relevant expert was not called to give evidence at trial. This issue of what matters the court can properly conclude when…
EXPERT WATCH 9: FAILURES TO COMPLY WITH THE PRE-ACTION PROTOCOL AND TO INFORM THE EXPERTS OF THE DEFENDANT’S CASE COULD RENDER THE EVIDENCE “USELESS”: AN EXPENSIVE DAY OUT FOR THE CLAIMANTS’ SOLICITORS…
Here we look at a decision not about the conduct of experts but the way in which the experts were instructed and failure to comply with pre-action protocols. On the face of it this is a decision of major importance…
EXPERT WATCH 8: “SCIENCE DOES NOT CHANGE” : EVIDENCE THAT WAS “UNIMPRESSIVE IN PARTS AND OF LITTLE ASSISTANCE TO THE COURT”
To end the week I am looking at another decision about expert witnesses (it has been a theme this week). This time we are looking at accident reconstruction experts. One expert was found wanting, the judge favoured the other. The…
EXPERT WATCH 7: “THIS CASE IS NOT SHORT OF ADVOCATES”: AN EXPERT REPORTING FOR THE CLAIMANT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ONE OF THEM: FURTHER THEY SHOULD HAVE DISCLOSED THAT THEY HAD “COPIED” THEIR REPORT
Yesterday I imposed a 24 hour respite on this series “unless something really interesting comes up”. I have broken that promise, it lasted 22 hours. However the cases on experts keep coming in and, I think, readers need to know…
EXPERT WATCH 6: THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT IS FAR BETTER QUALIFIED THAN THE CLAIMANT’S EXPERT: AN EXPERT WHO, IN PART, WAS ACTING AS AN ADVOCATE FOR THE CLAIMANT
I feel almost bound to apologise for adding another post to this series today. I am not going looking for cases on experts – they just keep coming up. Here we have a judgment given today in a clinical negligence…
EXPERT WATCH 5: AN EXPERT SHOULD DISCLOSE PREVIOUS CRITICISMS MADE BY JUDGES: PARTICULARLY WHEN THEY HAVE BEEN WARNED ABOUT THIS BEFORE…
We have seen a trend in a number of recent cases of advocates cross examining experts and referring to judicial criticism made in previous cases that experts have been involved in. The judgment here goes one further and indicates that…
EXPERT WATCH 4: THE EXPERT SHOULD INFORM THE COURT IF MEMBERSHIP OF A PROFESSIONAL ORGANISATION HAD CEASED, PARTICULARLY IF THIS IS LINKED TO DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THEM
We are returning (and not for the last time) to a recent decision where the court considered the expert evidence in detail. Here we look at the judgment in relation to an expert who failed, until prompted, to inform the…
EXPERT WATCH 3: EVIDENCE FROM EXPERTS ON FOREIGN LAW: SOME OF THE EXPERTS FOUND WANTING
Here we are looking at a judge’s assessment of witnesses who gave evidence as to foreign law. Some of the witnesses were found to be less then helpful. (This case appears to have taken up several months of court time….
EXPERT WATCH 2: THE EXPERT WHO REPORTED WITHOUT ALL THE RELEVANT EVIDENCE TO HAND AND THEN WOULD NOT RECOGNISE HE HAD MADE A MISTAKE
Here we look at a case where an expert reported without having all the relevant evidence to hand. In fact he only saw the claimant’s witness statements a few days before the trial. This, added to other issues, led to…
EXPERT WATCH 1: THE DUTY TO STATE THE SOURCES OF THE EXPERT’S INFORMATION
This is the start of a series examining cases where expert evidence is considered by the courts. As matters stand there are already dozens of posts on this site where the conduct of experts has been considered (and often criticised)…
WHEN A PARTY RELIES ON “NON PART 35 COMPLIANT” EXPERT REPORTS: THIS IS HARDLY LIKELY TO CARRY MUCH WEIGHT…
The first question the lawyer must ask when being presented with a report for use in proceeding is – is this report CPR 35 compliant? If it is not then it may have little, if any value. There is a…
THE RULES AND GUIDANCE RELATING TO NON-PARTY DISCLOSURE CONSIDERED AND APPLIED: “THE EXCEPTION RATHER THAN THE RULE”
We are returning to the issue of non-party disclosure, indeed to the same case as the previous post. That post highlighted the Master’s concerns about the way in which claimant’s application had been conducted. The same judgment also contains a…
WHEN A PARTY MAKES A SECOND APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT WITNESS HOW SHOULD THE COURT RESPOND? THE SAGA CONTINUED
We are looking at this case for the third time. There were issues in relation to witness evidence and expert evidence. The problems continued after trial when the judge realised that neither party had addressed her on a mandatory requirement…
IF YOU ARE GOING TO CRITICISE AN EXPERT THIS MUCH YOU SHOULD HAVE RAISED IT AT THE CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING: HIGH COURT REJECTS EACH PARTY’S ATTACKS ON OPPONENT’S EXPERTS
We have seen plenty of cases where the courts have not been slow in their criticism of expert witnesses. Here we have a different situation where the judge was critical of the attacks, by each party, on the credibility of…
HOW FAR IS A TRIAL JUDGE BOUND TO FOLLOW THE VIEWS OF A JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT? WELL – READ THIS FOR SOME TRENCHANT VIEWS…
When the parties jointly instruct an expert how far is the judge “bound” by the views that the expert reaches? This is an issue we are looking at for the second time within 6 days. We have an interesting consideration…
HEARINGS WHEN WITNESSES GIVE EVIDENCE FROM ABROAD: SOME POINTS FOR PRACTITIONERS (AND JUDGES) TO WATCH: “IT WOULD ASSIST THE LOWER COURTS IF FORMAL CLARIFICATION IS GIVEN ADDRESSING THAT TENSION HEAD ON”
There have been a number of cases where litigants have run into difficulties because they have not complied with the requirements for witnesses who give evidence remotely from abroad. We see an example of this case where there a conflict…
WHEN THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT REPORT IS OF “LITTLE OR NO” ASSISTANCE TO THE COURT: A CASE IN POINT
The courts encourages the use of jointly instructed experts However this does not mean that the case, or even key issues in the case, are necessarily determined by those experts. Here we have a case where the judge held that…
WHICH EXPERT WITNESS IS GOING TO BE PREFERRED? ONE EXPERT TOOK AN “UNREALISTIC APPROACH”
Knowing the reasons why a judge may prefer the evidence of one expert over another is an important part of a litigator’s skill. Each case is, of course, fact specific, but there are clear trends that can be discerned. Here…
SHOULD A PARTY BE ABLE TO INSTRUCT THEIR OWN EXPERT WHEN THEY DISAGREE WITH THE REPORT OF A JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
Here we are looking at a case where a party, dissatisfied with the approach of a jointly instructed expert, applied to the court for permission to instruct their own expert. The judgment contains a useful summary of the relevant principles….
FATAL ACCIDENT LAW AND PRACTICE: SEVEN WEBINARS TO HELP YOU UNDERSTAND LAW, PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE
Fatal accidents claims are often some of the most challenging areas for the litigator. Claims have to be investigated (and defended) with great care and sensitivity. To add to the difficulties the law relating to damages is almost wholly based…
PART 35 QUESTIONS TO EXPERTS A POINT ABOUT THE CASE LAW: HOW FAR CAN THE QUESTIONS GO? A CLOSE LOOK AT THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN MUTCH
The previous post about when experts should be called to give evidence also contained a consideration of the nature of questions that can be put to experts. One of my colleagues has suggested that the summary relating to the questioning…
WHEN SHOULD PARTIES BE ALLOWED TO CALL EXPERT WITNESSES TO GIVE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED (IN THE FAMILY COURT)
When should the courts permit experts to give evidence at trial? There are few cases on this topic and today we are looking at a decision in the family courts. The case is relevant to civil practitioners in that it…
YOU SPENT £1.2 MILLION ON EXPERTS AND IT WAS MAINLY MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN: DEFENDANTS ALLOWED TO RECOVER 20% OF FEES INCURRED
Sometimes you have to go looking for a pun as a headline for a blog post. Often they simply write themselves. In a case involving water companies who spent £1.2 million on experts, this was one of these cases. The…
PERIODICAL PAYMENTS AND PROVISIONAL DAMAGES 2025: WEBINAR 4th JUNE 2025
This webinar looks at recent cases in relation to periodical payments and periodical payments, including an interesting negligence case brought against solicitors who failed to claim provisional damages. Booking details are available here. It then looks at the…
EXPERTS IN COURT: “TRESPASSING ON THE JUDICIAL FUNCTION” AND “SEEKING TO ADVOCATE” ON BEHALF OF PARTY: THIS RARELY ENDS WELL…
There is no shortage of posts on this blogs where judges are critical of expert witnesses. Today we look at another such case where the judge found the expert’s approach “concerning” and went on to state that the expert was…
THE IMPORTANCE OF CONTEMPORANEOUS ATTENDANCE NOTES EXAMINED IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (BUT A DIFFERENT DIVISION TO THE ONE WE USUALLY LOOK AT)
Today we are taking a rare trip into the criminal courts, the Court of Appeal Criminal Division. However we are looking at an issue that affects most, if not all, lawyers. A client can attempt to blame their lawyer for…
AVOIDING UNDERSETTLEMENT: PROTECTING THE CLIENT AND PROTECTING YOURSELF: WEBINAR 29th MAY 2025
“We go back through your claim in fine detail and if we find that your previous solicitor wasn’t thorough enough and your claim was mishandled, we’ll squeeze out all the compensation that you’re entitled to, getting you more money, and…
PERSONAL INJURY POINTS 4: THE EMPLOYER WAS IN BREACH OF DUTY WHEN EMPLOYEE WAS INJURED CROSSING THE ROAD
Last week we looked at a case where someone was injured in their workplace, but there was no breach. Today we are looking a case where an employee was injured crossing the road and it was held that the employer…
CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 101: HOW NOT TO WRITE A LEGAL LETTER : DIMISSING CRUCIAL POINTS AS “COSMETIC” ERRORS LEADS TO REFERRAL TO THE SRA
There has not been a post in this series for some time. There was one case last week that made me decide to restart the series. It is not difficult to guess which case caused me concern. …
THE COURT DOES NOT REQUIRE EXPERT EVIDENCE TO CONSTRUE A TERM IN AN AGREEMENT: AN EXPERT CANNOT BE USED TO USURP THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT
Is an expert needed to construe a contractual agreement. Here we have a case where the Master was very much against the applicant who sought permission to rely on an expert. An expert was not needed to report on market…
EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE RISKS OF “ANCHORING”: THE EXPERT “GAVE THE SENSE OF TRYING TO ARGUE THE CLAIMANT’S CASE”
Today we are looking at a case where the judge had considerable reservations about expert evidence called on behalf of a claimant. Not all the problems that occurred were the fault of the expert. However she was the third expert…
THE ROLE OF LEADING COUNSEL IN RELATION TO EXPERT REPORTS AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: A CLIENT CAN PAY FOR WHAT THEY WANT, BUT THESE COSTS WILL NOT BE RECOVERABLE INTER PARTES
How far should leading counsel, or counsel generally, be involved in the preparation of expert reports and witness statements? One obvious reply is “not at all”, given that the evidence should come from the expert or witness. These issues were…
NEW EDITION OF THE KINGS BENCH GUIDE: THE GENERAL CHANGES AND THE GUIDANCE ON ANONYMITY ORDERS
There is a new edition of the King’s Bench Guide. There are some additions and changes. In particular the Guide notes the difference between an application for an anonymity order made at an approval hearing and one that is not….
THE RICS PRACTICE ALERT ON ACTING AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR AND OTHER HIGH VOLUME CASES: OF INTEREST TO ALL EXPERTS (AND THOSE WHO INSTRUCT THEM)
The RICS has produced a Practice Alert aimed specifically at those acting as expert witnesses in housing disrepair and other high volume cases. It some ways the Alert is surprising in that it says nothing new, that is most of…
DEALING WITH THE COUNTER-SCHEDULE AND THE DEFENDANT’S ARGUMENTS IN RELATION TO DAMAGES: WEBINAR 7th MAY 2025
Much of the task of the claimant lawyer concentrates on the task of building up the claim for damages to ensure proper compensation. However it is essential that the lawyer if fully aware of the arguments, case law and principles…
£1 MILLION CASE AUTOMATICALLY STRUCK OUT: RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS REFUSED: THE FACT THAT THIS WAS A “ROGUE SOLICITOR” WAS NOT A STRONG ARGUMENT IN FAVOUR OF REINSTATEMENT
The judgment of HHJ Hassall in Mr Martyn Ian Haynes v Total Plant Hire Limited is available as a link on an article in the Law Society Gazette, available here. The case involves a detailed consideration of the Denton criteria. In particular some of the arguments on…
RECENT CASES ON LOSS OF EARNINGS: WHAT CAN WE LEARN FROM THEM? WEBINAR 23rd APRIL 2025
Practitioners can learn a lot from looking at judgments on claims for loss of earnings. These provide a practical grounding of how the courts approach such claims and, in particular, how judges consider the evidence (or absence of evidence) in…
EXPERT REPORTS AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED IN THE COURTS AGAIN: LEADS TO A DOCTOR BEING ERASED FROM THE REGISTER OF DOCTORS
The judgment in Moodliar v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 913 (Admin) provides a salutary reminder to medical experts that giving expert evidence is a highly significant task. Failures in the process can lead to erasure from the medical register,…
You must be logged in to post a comment.