Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Expert evidence » Page 4
GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT

GRIFFITHS -v- TUI: SUPREME COURT FINDS FOR THE CLAIMANT: THE TRIAL WAS UNFAIR: POINTS SHOULD HAVE BEEN PUT TO THE EXPERT

November 29, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In a judgment today TUI UK Ltd  v Griffiths [2023] UKSC 48 the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the majority of the Court of Appeal.  It is an important decision on procedural fairness. In particular the duty of a…

DECISION TO DISMISS CLAIM BECAUSE OF ABSENCE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD ON APPEAL:

DECISION TO DISMISS CLAIM BECAUSE OF ABSENCE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD ON APPEAL:

November 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are looking at the second part of the decision in  Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB). The post yesterday looked at the decision in Doyle. Here we look at the judgment in Rowe, the other case…

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON'T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON'T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON’T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON’T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

October 31, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in  Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB) shows a surprising set of facts when an expert wrote directly to the court.  The expert made it clear that he was not…

WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR...

WEBINARS ON DAMAGES IN 2024: SOMETHING TO WARM UP THE WINTER DAYS EARLY IN THE NEW YEAR…

October 30, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Early next year I am presenting a series of eight webinars on personal injury damages.  The series looks at the  major heads of damages for personal injury and clinical negligence cases, with a particular emphasis on those claims in the…

CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE:  THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)

CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)

October 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Wambura & Ors v Barrick TZ Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB) Master Stevens rejected the claimants’ application to call an expert.  The judge contains a detailed consideration of the law and authorities relating to the court’s discretion…

PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE

PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE

October 3, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One of the issues decided by Mr Justice Mellor in Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2023] EWHC 2408 (Ch) related to the attempts by a party (COPA) to adduce expert evidence from other trials by way of hearsay evidence…

AN EXPERT SHOULD HAVE EXPERTISE IN THE ISSUE THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE ON: THEY CAN'T SIMPLY TEACH THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CASE

AN EXPERT SHOULD HAVE EXPERTISE IN THE ISSUE THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE ON: THEY CAN’T SIMPLY TEACH THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CASE

September 27, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some important observations on expert evidence in the judgment of Mrs Justice Bacon in Sycurio Ltd v PCI-Pal PLC & Anor [2023] EWHC 2161 (Pat). An expert must give evidence within the scope of their expertise.  To assert…

PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM "MUST" TO "MORE THAN PROBABLE" REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE

PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM “MUST” TO “MORE THAN PROBABLE” REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE

September 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Nash v Volskwagen Financial Services (UK) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2326 (KB) contains  important observations in relation to the law and evidence relating to causation.  However I want to look at the judge’s consideration…

COST BITES 98: THE SIMILARITIES IN MEDICAL REPORTS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE COSTS OF REPORTS

COST BITES 98: THE SIMILARITIES IN MEDICAL REPORTS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE COSTS OF REPORTS

August 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are returning again to HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) Costs Judge James considered the sums that should be allowed in relation to the claimants’ medical reports.  This involved a close examination of the reports…

PROVING THINGS 231: "WITNESS STATEMENTS" THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT

PROVING THINGS 231: “WITNESS STATEMENTS” THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT

August 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Cheshire Estate and legal Limited -v- Blanchfield & Others*  HHJ Bever, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, considered witness statements  served by the claimant that failed to comply with the Practice Direction. One was expert evidence posing…

EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: THE DUTY TO INFORM EXPERTS OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO INFORM THE COURT AND PARTIES OF A CHANGE OF VIEWS

July 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB)  (A copy of the judgment, on Old Square Chambers website, is available here.)  Again we are looking at the judge’s comments…

EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: "A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE... WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED"

EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: “A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE… WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED”

July 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter sent out another warning about the inadequate state of expert reports.  Here we look at the judgment in relation to the care experts. (A copy of…

BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL:  THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND

BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL: THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND

June 8, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have looked at the decision in relation to costs in the case of ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Anor [2023] EWHC 986 (KB) in an earlier post.  The decision on costs, and the primary judgment on…

WHEN AN EXPERT DECLAIMS A POINT "WITH A LEVEL OF SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY": BUT THE HANDWRITING SAMPLE WAS NOT FROM THE CLAIMANT

WHEN AN EXPERT DECLAIMS A POINT “WITH A LEVEL OF SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY”: BUT THE HANDWRITING SAMPLE WAS NOT FROM THE CLAIMANT

May 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are plenty of examples of difficulties with expert’s giving evidence on this blog.  Another example  of problematic expert report can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in  Packham v Wightman & Ors [2023] EWHC 1256 (KB)….

COST BITES 84: MEDICAL AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF ITS BILL TO SHOW WHAT THE EXPERT WAS PAID: DECISION ON APPEAL

COST BITES 84: MEDICAL AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF ITS BILL TO SHOW WHAT THE EXPERT WAS PAID: DECISION ON APPEAL

May 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Paul Hughes for providing me with a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust -v- Hoskin, County Court at Manchester22nd May 2023, a copy is available here  HoskinsAppealJudgment. …

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

May 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

A new edition of the King’s Bench Division Guide was published last week (although it is dated March 2023).  I will take a short look at the major changes. Firstly looking at a new passage in relation to the instruction…

BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE

BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE

April 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Rowbottom v The Estate of Peter Howard, Deceased & Anor [2023] EWHC 931 (KB) HHL Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) was critical of the role of one of the experts in the case. “A second reason…

EXPERT WITNESS OBTAINS ANONYMITY: BUT THEIR TONE DEMONSTRATED DISRESPECT FOR THE COURT

EXPERT WITNESS OBTAINS ANONYMITY: BUT THEIR TONE DEMONSTRATED DISRESPECT FOR THE COURT

April 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

An earlier post dealt with the judge’s decision in M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC.  However there is a subsequent judgment that demonstrates an extraordinary response on the part of the expert involved.  In a second judgment,  M v F &…

PARTS OF THE EXPERT'S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT

PARTS OF THE EXPERT’S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT

April 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC 186 Recorder Reed set out the importance of an expert knowing, and complying with, the rules relating to the presentation of expert evidence.  The judgment also emphasises the importance of the lawyers…

COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS

COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS

April 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The principles relating to the court granting permission to a party to change expert were considered in detail by Mrs Justice O’Farrell in  Avantage (Cheshire) Ltd & Ors v GB Building Solutions Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 802 (TCC).  The…

HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT'S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED

HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED

April 4, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Issues relating to handwriting experts comprise a surprisingly large percentage of the search terms that lead to this blog.  The question of the quality of such experts was considered by Master Clark in Watts v Watts [2023] EWHC 679 (Ch)….

PROVING THINGS 249: APPELLANT FAILS TO PROVE LACK OF CAPACITY: SHORTFALLS WITH THE EXPERT EVIDENCE

March 20, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Cannon v Bar Standards Board [2023] EWCA Civ 278 the Court of Appeal held that expert evidence placed before it failed to establish that an appellant lacked capacity.  The case provides importance guidance about the nature and quality of…

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE CAN HANDLE EXPERT WITNESSES AT EVERY POINT OF THE SPECTRUM

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE CAN HANDLE EXPERT WITNESSES AT EVERY POINT OF THE SPECTRUM

March 10, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Fawcett & Ors v TUI UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 400 (KB) Mr Dexter Dias KC (setting as a Deputy High Court Judge) refused the claimant’s application to exclude the defendant’s expert evidence.  The matters to which the claimant objected…

SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT'S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION

SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT’S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION

February 23, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Czernuszka v King [2023] EWHC 380 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the duty of care owed to those taking place in sporting activities.  It also shows the important role of…

YOU'VE INSTRUCTED THE WRONG EXPERT: AND THIS HAS MAJOR CONSEQUENCES

YOU’VE INSTRUCTED THE WRONG EXPERT: AND THIS HAS MAJOR CONSEQUENCES

February 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in GKE v Gunning [2023] EWHC 332 (KB). This time to look at the judge’s observations on the claimant’s expert on liability.   The judge observed that the claimant had instructed the…

COST BITES 49: ARE THE COSTS OF A MEDICAL AGENCY RECOVERABLE IN THE FIXED COSTS REGIME? DISTRICT JUDGE FINDS THAT THEY ARE

January 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Costs, Court fees, Experts, Fixed Costs, Members Content

Are the costs of a medical agency recoverable under the fixed costs regime? I am grateful to barrister John Meehan for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Phillips in Wilkinson-Mulvaney -v- UK Insurance Ltd (19th January…

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST EXPERT WITNESS SET ASIDE ON APPEAL: THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT'S CONCLUSIONS CAN BE CRITICISED DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF THEIR DUTY

NON-PARTY COSTS ORDER AGAINST EXPERT WITNESS SET ASIDE ON APPEAL: THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT’S CONCLUSIONS CAN BE CRITICISED DOES NOT AMOUNT TO A FLAGRANT DISREGARD OF THEIR DUTY

January 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Conduct, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Nadia Whittaker for sending me a copy of the judgment of Mr Justice Sweeting in Robinson -v- Liverpool Hospitals NHS Trust and Mercier [2023] EWHC 21 (KB), a copy of the judgment is available here. …

JUST BECAUSE A MATTER IS TECHNICALLY COMPLICATED DOES NOT MEAN THAT EXPERTS NEED ATTEND TRIAL

JUST BECAUSE A MATTER IS TECHNICALLY COMPLICATED DOES NOT MEAN THAT EXPERTS NEED ATTEND TRIAL

August 18, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Siemens Mobility Ltd v High Speed Two (HS2) Ltd [2022] EWHC 2190 (TCC) Mrs Justice O’Farrell considered an argument that the technical issues that arose in an action led to the need for experts to attend court. This argument…

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PROTOCOL LEADS TO COSTS OF A MEDICAL REPORT NOT BEING RECOVERED

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH PROTOCOL LEADS TO COSTS OF A MEDICAL REPORT NOT BEING RECOVERED

August 11, 2022 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Costs, Expert evidence, Fixed Costs, Members Content

I was informed recently that permission to appeal was refused in the case of Greyson -v- Fuller.   I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for sending me a copy of the decision in Glendining -v- McCarthy,* where DDJ Causton…

APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS "FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS"

APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: THE RULES WERE NOT FOLLOWED AND THE REPORT WAS “FAR BELOW THE STANDARD OF ANALYSIS THAT THIS COURT IS ENTITLED TO EXPECT FROM AN EXPERT WITNESS”

July 19, 2022 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Coronavirus, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In North Yorkshire Clinical Commissioning Group v E (Covid Vaccination) (Rev1) [2022] EWCOP 15 Mr Justice Poole disallowed an application by a respondent in relation to expert evidence.  The expert had been instructed without compliance with the procedural rules in…

EXPERT WHO WALKED "ON THE PAVEMENT HAND IN HAND" WITH THE CLIENT: EXPERT WITH ALL THE HALLMARKS OF THE MENTALITY OF AN ADVOCATE

EXPERT WHO WALKED “ON THE PAVEMENT HAND IN HAND” WITH THE CLIENT: EXPERT WITH ALL THE HALLMARKS OF THE MENTALITY OF AN ADVOCATE

June 14, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized

We have already looked at the judgment of Mr Justice Mostyn in Gallagher v Gallagher (No.2) (Financial Remedies) [2022] EWFC 53 in relation to costs.  There are some telling observations in that judgment in relation to the role of the expert…

PROVING THINGS 232: "THE RULES OF THE GAME OF ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL HAVE NOT BEEN DRAFTED WITH CIVIL LIABILITY IN MIND": APPEAL LEADS TO OVERTURNING OF JUDGMENT ON FOOTBALLER'S NEGLIGENCE: A REMATCH IS ORDERED

PROVING THINGS 232: “THE RULES OF THE GAME OF ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL HAVE NOT BEEN DRAFTED WITH CIVIL LIABILITY IN MIND”: APPEAL LEADS TO OVERTURNING OF JUDGMENT ON FOOTBALLER’S NEGLIGENCE: A REMATCH IS ORDERED

May 18, 2022 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Fulham Football Club v Jones [2022] EWHC 1108 (QB) Mr Justice Lane allowed an appeal in a case where a footballer had found to be negligent when tackling an opponent.  The judgment considers the issue of liability in the…

AN EXPERT REPORT THAT DID NOT COMPLY WITH PRACTICALLY EVERY REQUIREMENT OF CPR 35: IT FAILS TO PERSUADE THE COURT

AN EXPERT REPORT THAT DID NOT COMPLY WITH PRACTICALLY EVERY REQUIREMENT OF CPR 35: IT FAILS TO PERSUADE THE COURT

May 9, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

An example of the importance of the format of an expert report can be found in the judgment of Master  David Cook in Pal -v- Damen [2022] EWHC 004697 (QB). It is a decision that shows that the courts will…

RAKING UP OLD CASES WAS NOT A FRUITFUL GROUND FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION OF AN EXPERT

May 2, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In contemporary litigation it is not unusual for the parties to spend some time (perhaps a considerably time) looking for material about previous cases that expert witnesses were involved in.  This may not always be time well spent.   In Richards…

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

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

January 27, 2022 · by gexall · in Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

WHEN A CLAIMANT APPEARS AS THEIR OWN EXPERT WITNESS: IT RARELY ENDS WELL

December 23, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

WHEN A CLAIMANT RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE TO PROVE LIABILITY: THE (NOT SO) SLIPPERY SLOPE TO FAILURE

WHEN A CLAIMANT RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE TO PROVE LIABILITY: THE (NOT SO) SLIPPERY SLOPE TO FAILURE

December 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to barrister Frederick Simpson for sending me his note of a decision where the claimant relied heavily on expert evidence in order to establish their claim.  There were weaknesses in the report which contributed to the claimant’s…

WHEN YOUR CASE LARGELY RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: MAKE SURE YOUR EXPERT IS NOT VIEWED AS BEING PARTISAN

WHEN YOUR CASE LARGELY RELIES ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: MAKE SURE YOUR EXPERT IS NOT VIEWED AS BEING PARTISAN

November 1, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

LATE, AND BROAD, APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: HIGH COURT DECISION

LATE, AND BROAD, APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: HIGH COURT DECISION

October 26, 2021 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

In  BES Commercial Electricity Ltd & Ors v Cheshire West & Chester Council [2021] EWHC 2820 (QB) Mr Justice Calver refused a very late application to adduce expert evidence.  The commentary in relation to witness statements is also interesting.  The…

EXPERT EVIDENCE – UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS AND AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 20th OCTOBER 2020

EXPERT EVIDENCE – UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS AND AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 20th OCTOBER 2020

October 14, 2021 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

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

October 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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"

GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL 2: THE OTHER GROUNDS OF APPEAL: AN EXPERT’S REPORT WITHOUT REASONING IS “ALL BUT WORTHLESS”

October 11, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

GRIFFITHS -v- TUI IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (1): JUDGES AND EXPERTS: THE COURT IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP

October 10, 2021 · by gexall · in Appeals, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

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

October 4, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

EXPERTS GIVING EVIDENCE IS “NOT A GAME”: £1.4 MILLION VALUATION FOUND TO BE £3,230

September 24, 2021 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

SERIES OF WEBINARS ON CIVIL EVIDENCE: COMING TO YOUR SCREENS SOON

SERIES OF WEBINARS ON CIVIL EVIDENCE: COMING TO YOUR SCREENS SOON

September 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Members Content, Webinar

Now that the nights are drawing in people’s thoughts will, almost invariably, be drawn towards matters of civil evidence and the need to prove things. To cater for this I am presenting six webinars , covering key aspects of civil…

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:

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:

August 20, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

WHEN TWO EXPERTS ARE BETTER THAN ONE: IT MAY BE MORE ART THAN SCIENCE...

WHEN TWO EXPERTS ARE BETTER THAN ONE: IT MAY BE MORE ART THAN SCIENCE…

July 15, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

EXPERT EVIDENCE, NECESSARY EXPERTISE AND ADMISSIBILITY: BOP-ME, MASKS AND EXPERTISE

July 5, 2021 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

WHEN A PARTY WANTS TO CHANGE ITS EXPERT: PRE-ACTION REPORTS, “EXPERT SHOPPING” AND CANDOUR

July 2, 2021 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 … 8 Next →

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 3rd JUNE 2026
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 79: COURT REJECTS CLAIMANT’S AMENDMENT APPLICATION BECAUSE THERE WERE “REASONABLY ARGUABLE” ISSUES IN RELATION TO LIMITATION
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 78: CLAIMANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO AMEND PARTICULARS IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE/FATAL ACCIDENT CLAIM
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: AMENDING PLEADINGS : A REVIEW OF THE PRINCIPLES: WHAT IS MEANT BY “LATE”? (MAY 2015)
  • COST BITES : BOTH PARTIES MADE “PART 36 OFFERS”: BOTH WERE INEFFECTIVE (AND THE MASTER WOULD NOT HAVE IMPOSED THE USUAL CONSEQUENCES EVEN IF THEY WERE VALID…)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
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
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.