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 5
WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE BECOMES REDUNDANT:  "WE DO NOT HAVE TRIAL BY EXPERT IN THIS COUNTRY: WE HAVE TRIAL BY JUDGE"

WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE BECOMES REDUNDANT: “WE DO NOT HAVE TRIAL BY EXPERT IN THIS COUNTRY: WE HAVE TRIAL BY JUDGE”

August 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Fatal Accidents, Members Content

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…

THE INSTRUCTION OF EXPERTS : LOOKING AT GUIDANCE FROM THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE

THE INSTRUCTION OF EXPERTS : LOOKING AT GUIDANCE FROM THE CROWN PROSECUTION SERVICE

July 20, 2020 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Useful links

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…

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO AMEND CLAIM, OR INTRODUCE NEW EXPERT,  WHERE APPLICATION TO ADJOURN BECAUSE OF COVID ALLOWED

CLAIMANT NOT ALLOWED TO AMEND CLAIM, OR INTRODUCE NEW EXPERT, WHERE APPLICATION TO ADJOURN BECAUSE OF COVID ALLOWED

July 9, 2020 · by gexall · in Amendment, Applications, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Members Content

In Ludlow -v- Buckinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust & BMI Healthcare Ltd [2020] EWHC 1720 (QB) Mr Justice Jay allowed an application for an adjournment on the grounds that a trial could not take place remotely.  However, he refused the claimant’s…

THE EXPERT THAT DOESN'T GIVE HIS SOURCES (EXCEPT WIKIPEDIA): A PRACTICE DEPRECATED BY THE COURT.

THE EXPERT THAT DOESN’T GIVE HIS SOURCES (EXCEPT WIKIPEDIA): A PRACTICE DEPRECATED BY THE COURT.

June 25, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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)

PROVING THINGS 177: WHEN YOU ARE RELYING ON A MEDICAL EXPERT ON CAUSATION WHO “SHOOTS FROM THE HIP” (IT DOESN’T END WELL)

June 22, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE PERILS AND THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th JUNE 2020

EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE PERILS AND THE PITFALLS: WEBINAR 29th JUNE 2020

June 4, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Courses, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The problems that experts can cause in cases (often to the side that instructed them) have been extensively catalogued on this blog over the years.  On the 29th June I am giving a webinar on the perils and pitfalls of…

JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: "ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN"

JUST BECAUSE YOU GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE THAT DOESN’T MAKE YOU AN EXPERT: “ONE OF THE MOST EGREGIOUS AND NAKED USURPATION[S] OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE COURT THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN”

June 1, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Last week the “Covid Repeats” posts on this blog highlighted a few (and just a few) of the cases where judges had been critical of the role of experts, or experts involved in cases has been problematic.  That this remains…

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN GRANTED: CPR 3.9 PROPERLY APPLIED IS ARTICLE 6 COMPLIANT

May 31, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The previous two posts on this blog have been warning against complacency in relation to the Denton principles.  This is the third in that series.  In Magee v Willmott [2020] EWHC 1378 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip allowed an appeal in…

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER FOR EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION GOES UP IN SMOKE...

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ORDER FOR EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION GOES UP IN SMOKE…

May 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Extensions of time, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

Possibly the most difficult position you could put yourself in in litigation is for the court to make an order, do something the court did not allow, not get permission in advance, and then seek relief from sanctions thereafter.   …

COVID REPEATS 37: CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERT WITNESSES: HINTS, TIPS AND LINKS

COVID REPEATS 37: CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERT WITNESSES: HINTS, TIPS AND LINKS

May 29, 2020 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The impartiality, or otherwise, of expert witness witnesses was in the news in June 2014.  Since expert evidence has been a constant theme on this blog.  This would seem an appropriate time to revisit a post about the cross-examination of…

COVID REPEATS 33: YOU'LL NEVER GET TYRED OF THIS: AN EXPERT REPORT THAT WAS “EXTRAORDINARY IN ITS PRESENTATION AND SHOT THROUGH WITH BREATH TAKING ARROGANCE”:

COVID REPEATS 33: YOU’LL NEVER GET TYRED OF THIS: AN EXPERT REPORT THAT WAS “EXTRAORDINARY IN ITS PRESENTATION AND SHOT THROUGH WITH BREATH TAKING ARROGANCE”:

May 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

This is “experts” week for our stroll back through various posts on this blog.  In September 2017  barrister Brian McCluggage for sent me a copy of the decision of Her Honour Judge Belcher in Hatfield -v- Drax Power Ltd (18/08/2017) which…

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, Members Content

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…

EXPERTS CAN'T BE ADVOCATES: IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT

EXPERTS CAN’T BE ADVOCATES: IT IS AS SIMPLE AS THAT

May 21, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some interesting observations about the role of the expert made by Judge Asif Malek in Neil Picklessharon Pickles v Revenue & Customs (Whether crediting a directors’ loan account which was freely available for the directors/members to draw upon…

THE EXPERT'S DUTY TO GIVE A RANGE OF OPINION: A DECISION NOT TO DO SO "BORDERING ON ARROGANCE"

THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO GIVE A RANGE OF OPINION: A DECISION NOT TO DO SO “BORDERING ON ARROGANCE”

May 11, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

Experts have a mandatory duty under the rules to give a range of opinion for their advices.  I am grateful to Gary Smith from Prince Evans & Co for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Belcher in…

EXPERT'S CONDUCT DID NOT LEAD TO EVIDENCE BEING DISALLOWED: CLAIMANT'S CASE REMAINS ON TRACK

EXPERT’S CONDUCT DID NOT LEAD TO EVIDENCE BEING DISALLOWED: CLAIMANT’S CASE REMAINS ON TRACK

February 26, 2020 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Blackpool Borough Council v Volkerfitzpatrick Ltd and Range Roofing and Cladding Ltd & Ors [2020] EWHC 387 (TCC)   HHJ Davies (sitting as a High Court judge) carried out a detailed consideration of the conduct of an expert when considering,…

EXPERT WITNESSES: HANDING THE JUDGE AN UNSORTED MEDLEY OF DOCUMENTS MAY NOT GO DOWN TOO WELL

EXPERT WITNESSES: HANDING THE JUDGE AN UNSORTED MEDLEY OF DOCUMENTS MAY NOT GO DOWN TOO WELL

February 24, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

 There was one aspect of the evidence mentioned in the judgment Morrow v Shrewsbury Rugby Union Football Club Ltd [2020] EWHC 379 (QB) Mrs Justice Farbey that was somewhat unusual.  An expert handed the judge a “file of documents” to…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 77: THE COURT MUST KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4(2)

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 77: THE COURT MUST KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4(2)

January 15, 2020 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

CPR 35.4(2) is often overlooked. This rule imposes a duty on a party applying for permission to rely on expert evidence to inform the court how much the expert is likely to cost.  This is often clear at the costs…

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (6): WHY WE STILL FRET OVER EXPERTS ...

2019 AND CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE YEAR IN REVIEW (6): WHY WE STILL FRET OVER EXPERTS …

December 11, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

It is no surprise that there are numerous posts on experts this year.  26 years after the blast from the courts on the role of experts  in the Ikerian Reefer [1993] 2 Lloyds Reports 68 there are still  regular reports…

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP - NOVEMBER 2019

CIVIL PROCEDURE AND COSTS: BLOG AND ARTICLES ROUND UP – NOVEMBER 2019

November 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

Here we have links to blogs and articles about civil procedure and costs from November 2019. COSTS Costs Barrister Blaming others Costs Barrister The undiscovered country Herbert Smith Freehills Court of Appeal confirms jurisdiction to award claimant interim payment on account of costs…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 72:  THE EXPERT'S DUTY TO LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE AND GIVE REASONS FOR THEIR VIEWS (A MANDATORY OBLIGATION MORE HONOURED IN THE BREACH...)

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 72: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO LOOK AT BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE AND GIVE REASONS FOR THEIR VIEWS (A MANDATORY OBLIGATION MORE HONOURED IN THE BREACH…)

November 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The recent post on the decision in Ashley Wilde Group Ltd v BCPL Ltd [2019] EWHC 3166 (IPEC) highlights a common omission from many expert reports. The expert’s duty to consider whether there is a range of opinion and to give…

EXPERTS, IMPARTIALITY AND CELEBRITY BEDSPREADS: BE CAREFUL OF THE WAY YOU INSTRUCT EXPERTS AND YOU MAY SLEEP TIGHTLY (YOU SHOULD BE SO LUCKY)

EXPERTS, IMPARTIALITY AND CELEBRITY BEDSPREADS: BE CAREFUL OF THE WAY YOU INSTRUCT EXPERTS AND YOU MAY SLEEP TIGHTLY (YOU SHOULD BE SO LUCKY)

November 26, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Ashley Wilde Group Ltd v BCPL Ltd [2019] EWHC 3166 (IPEC)   HHJ Melissa Clarke considered, and was critical of, the way in which an expert was instructed.  The difficulty was that the appointed expert moved from “hired gun” hired…

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE'S DECISION

NO SECOND BITE OF A CHERRY AFTER A TRIAL: COURT OF APPEAL CONFIRMS JUDGE’S DECISION

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

In  L’Oreal (UK) Ltd & Anor v Liqwd Inc & Anor [2019] EWCA Civ 1943  the Court of Appeal confirmed the trial judge’s decision not to admit new evidence that a defendant attempted to introduce after judgment was handed down….

PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT'S WITNESSES

PROVING THINGS 169: WHEN THE DEFENDANT CALLS NO (LAY) EVIDENCE AND TRIES TO PROVE ITS CASE THROUGH THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESSES

November 25, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Clinical Negligence, Fatal Accidents, Members Content, Witness statements

There are a number of interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Coe in Esegbona v King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (false imprisonment in hospital) [2019] EWHC 77 (QB). One of which is the defendant’s failure to call any…

DEFENDANT'S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL REFUSED: A PROBLEM OF THEIR OWN MAKING: THE TRIAL WILL GO AHEAD

DEFENDANT’S APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT OF TRIAL REFUSED: A PROBLEM OF THEIR OWN MAKING: THE TRIAL WILL GO AHEAD

November 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Adjournments, Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Useful links

There is an interesting summary of   the decision in Mitchell -v- Precis 545 Ltd (15/11/2019)  on Kings Chambers website. A report by my colleague Jeremy Roussak of a case where he represented the claimant and where HHJ Freedman refused a…

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN'T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

SOLICITORS GIVING EVIDENCE: IT JUST DOESN’T HELP: IS THIS EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GIVE ORALLY?

November 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

The danger of witness statements from solicitors purporting to give evidence as to fact has been emphasised many times in the cases reported on the blog.   The danger can be seen again in the judgment of Ms Pat Treacy (sitting…

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROMPT APPLICATIONS

APPLICATION FOR RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: THE IMPORTANCE OF PROMPT APPLICATIONS

November 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

In Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Muhammad Ali Junaid Food Trends Ltd (Now Dissolved) & Ors[2019] EWHC 2769 (QB) Matthew Gullick (sitting as a High Court judge) granted the claimants relief from sanctions in relation to late service…

PROVING THINGS 167: BUNDLES, EXPERTS, ABSENT WITNESS, UNPLEADED DEFENCES AND... SEWAGE: ALL MODERN LITIGATION IS HERE...

PROVING THINGS 167: BUNDLES, EXPERTS, ABSENT WITNESS, UNPLEADED DEFENCES AND… SEWAGE: ALL MODERN LITIGATION IS HERE…

October 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Bundles, Case Management, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

 The judgment of HHJ Russen (QC) (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Kivells Ltd v Torridge District Council [2019] EWHC 2846 (TCC), contains a number of interesting scenarios in relation  to civil evidence.  Many  of the common problems of…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD...

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 67: EXPERTS ASKING THE COURT FOR DIRECTIONS: THIS CAN REALLY CUT THE MUSTARD…

October 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One, unusual, aspect of the decision in Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) is that the experts had sought directions from the court. This brings attention to the (apparently) little used provisions of CPR 35.14.  Experts have the…

WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RECORD THEIR MEETING WITH AN EXPERT WITNESS? TWO EXAMPLES WHERE THE COURT'S FOUND THAT AN EXPERT'S STATEMENT OF AN INTERVIEW WAS UNRELIABLE

WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO RECORD THEIR MEETING WITH AN EXPERT WITNESS? TWO EXAMPLES WHERE THE COURT’S FOUND THAT AN EXPERT’S STATEMENT OF AN INTERVIEW WAS UNRELIABLE

October 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

An earlier post dealt with the case of Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) and the claimant’s decision to record her appointments with the defendant’s medical experts.  The issue of what, precisely, was said to an expert can…

CLAIMANT'S QUESTIONS TO DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS DISALLOWED: PART 35 HAS A REQUIREMENT FOR PROPORTIONALITY: EXPERTS SEEK HELP

CLAIMANT’S QUESTIONS TO DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS DISALLOWED: PART 35 HAS A REQUIREMENT FOR PROPORTIONALITY: EXPERTS SEEK HELP

October 13, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There is another aspect of the judgment of Master Davison in In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) that is of considerable interest.  The Master disallowed a series of lengthy questions to the experts.   The Master pointed out…

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT'S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT'S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE  OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

COURT ADMITS CLAIMANT’S TAPES OF CONSULTATIONS WITH DEFENDANT’S EXPERTS: PROBATIVE VALUE OUTWEIGHS REPREHENSIBLE CONDUCT

October 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

In  Mustard v Flower & Ors [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB) Master Davison allowed the claimant to produce as evidence the tapes they had recorded of their consultations with the defendant’s medical experts.   This decision raises some interesting issues. (The case…

THE HONEST WITNESS WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ACCEPTED - BUT WHO STILL WON HER CASE: A CLOSE ANALYSIS OF  THE LAY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN MORDEL

THE HONEST WITNESS WHOSE EVIDENCE WAS NOT ACCEPTED – BUT WHO STILL WON HER CASE: A CLOSE ANALYSIS OF THE LAY AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN MORDEL

October 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

The result of the judgment today  in Mordel v Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 2591 (QB) has already been well publicised.  A mother succeeded in her claim that the defendant trust was negligent in failing to check her…

WHEN WITNESSES ATTEMPT TO GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE: LOOK OUT FOR THOSE PURPLE PASSAGES

WHEN WITNESSES ATTEMPT TO GIVE EXPERT EVIDENCE: LOOK OUT FOR THOSE PURPLE PASSAGES

October 8, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Members Content, Witness statements

This blog has reported on numerous cases where lay witnesses have attempted to give expert evidence (and, indeed, where expert witnesses have tried to give evidence of matters of fact).  This issue can be seen in the judgment of Lord…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 66: THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 66: THE COURT HAS TO KNOW HOW MUCH AN EXPERT WILL COST: CPR 35.4

October 7, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

A party seeking to rely on expert evidence requires permission from the court. It is surprising how often the rule requiring the court to be provided with details of the cost of that expert is overlooked. “When parties apply for…

PAYING EXPERT'S FEES: INFORMING AN EXPERT THAT A HEARING IS CANCELLED AND - GETTING STRUCK OFF THE ROLL OF SOLICITORS ...

PAYING EXPERT’S FEES: INFORMING AN EXPERT THAT A HEARING IS CANCELLED AND – GETTING STRUCK OFF THE ROLL OF SOLICITORS …

September 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment in the case of   Clegg v Solicitors Regulation Authority [2019] EWHC 2408. A solicitor was struck off, in circumstances  that could easily have been avoided.   It required the simple step of informing an expert that a trial had…

HOW DO YOU VALUE A FOOTBALL CLUB: EXPERTS DISCUSS THE ODDS: BLADES AWAY

HOW DO YOU VALUE A FOOTBALL CLUB: EXPERTS DISCUSS THE ODDS: BLADES AWAY

September 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There is an interesting passage in the judgment in UTB LLC v Sheffield United Ltd & Ors [2019] EWHC 2322 (Ch) in relation to experts. It is an interesting example of expert evidence of valuation in a, relatively unusual, case…

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DANGERS OF INADVERTENTLY MISLEADING THE COURT: CHECK BEFORE YOU ASSERT (ALSO A MESSAGE HERE FOR EXPERTS)

WITNESS STATEMENTS: THE DANGERS OF INADVERTENTLY MISLEADING THE COURT: CHECK BEFORE YOU ASSERT (ALSO A MESSAGE HERE FOR EXPERTS)

September 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Witness statements

The judgment of Master Clark in Baynton-Williams v Baynton-Williams [2019] EWHC 2179 (Ch) contains a number of important lessons : (i) for anyone preparing a witness statement to be careful not to inadvertently mislead the court; (ii) for experts – on…

PROVING THINGS 161: DOCUMENTS BEING DELIBERATELY DESTROYED AND EXPERTS WHO WERE OF VERY LIMITED ASSISTANCE

PROVING THINGS 161: DOCUMENTS BEING DELIBERATELY DESTROYED AND EXPERTS WHO WERE OF VERY LIMITED ASSISTANCE

September 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment in  Bajaj Healthcare Ltd v Fine Organics Ltd [2019] EWHC 2316 (Ch) is in what could appear to be a fairly dry dispute about the supply of goods. As the judge observed this was not a simple sale…

THE EXPERT AS ADVOCATE AND PROVIDING "CRITICAL COMMENTARY": IMPORTANT POINTS ON THE ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS TO TAKE AWAY

THE EXPERT AS ADVOCATE AND PROVIDING “CRITICAL COMMENTARY”: IMPORTANT POINTS ON THE ROLE OF THE EXPERT WITNESS TO TAKE AWAY

August 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some interesting comments on experts in the judgment of Matthew Gullick (sitting as a High Court Judge) in  Pepe’s Piri Piri Ltd & Anor v Junaid & Ors [2019] EWHC 2097. “It is not part of the duty…

AN "EMBARRASSING" EXPERT WHO USED AN EXPLETIVE WHILST GIVING EVIDENCE: GUESS WHERE THIS CASE IS GOING?

AN “EMBARRASSING” EXPERT WHO USED AN EXPLETIVE WHILST GIVING EVIDENCE: GUESS WHERE THIS CASE IS GOING?

August 14, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Arksey v Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1276 (QB) is interesting on the subject of causation and medical negligence.  However the claimant’s problems came largely  from reliance on an…

THE DANGERS OF AN "ENTHUSIASTIC" EXPERT - CASTS DOUBTS ON THEIR RELIABILITY

THE DANGERS OF AN “ENTHUSIASTIC” EXPERT – CASTS DOUBTS ON THEIR RELIABILITY

August 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Clinical Negligence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Most clients are happy to find an expert witness who agrees with their case. Even better, it may be thought, is an eminent expert who feels very strongly about the case.  However, as we have seen so often on this…

WHEN THE EXPERT WITNESS ACTUALLY SAYS THEY ARE AN "ADVOCATE": WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN?

WHEN THE EXPERT WITNESS ACTUALLY SAYS THEY ARE AN “ADVOCATE”: WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN?

July 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In LIC Telecommunications SARL & Anor v VTB Capital Plc & Ors [2019] EWHC 1747 (Comm)  Mrs Justice Moulder made some telling observations in relation to the expert evidence. THE CASE The application concerned whether certain proceedings were duly authorised….

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON "SPECIALIST" EVIDENCE AS TO LIFE EXPECTANCY: THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH SUCH EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED AND CONSIDERED

DEFENDANT REFUSED PERMISSION TO RELY ON “SPECIALIST” EVIDENCE AS TO LIFE EXPECTANCY: THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN WHICH SUCH EVIDENCE IS ALLOWED AND CONSIDERED

June 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Dodds v Arif & Anor [2019] EWHC 1512 (QB) Master Davison refused the defendant’s application to rely on a specialist report in relation to the claimant’s life expectancy. The judgment also contains an important summary of the circumstances in…

PROVING THINGS 154: CLOSE CONNECTION IN TIME DOES NOT ESTABLISH CAUSATION IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: EXPERTS STRAYING BEYOND THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE

PROVING THINGS 154: CLOSE CONNECTION IN TIME DOES NOT ESTABLISH CAUSATION IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE: EXPERTS STRAYING BEYOND THEIR AREA OF EXPERTISE

June 10, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Professional negligence,

In AXO v Salisbury NHS Foundation Trust [2019] EWHC 1454 (QB)  Mrs Justice YIP considered the issue of causation in a clinical negligence case.  Liability was admitted but the claimant failed to establish causation. THE CASE The claimant child was…

EXPERT WITNESSES: A CRISIS IN THE CRIMINAL COURTS - RECOMMENDED READING FOR ALL LITIGATORS

EXPERT WITNESSES: A CRISIS IN THE CRIMINAL COURTS – RECOMMENDED READING FOR ALL LITIGATORS

June 6, 2019 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Useful links

Matthew Scott’s “Barrister Blogger” blog is always an interesting read.  His latest post Expert witnesses: a crisis in the criminal courts  is essential reading for everyone involved in any type of litigation – and also for anyone who is an…

THE EXPERT WITNESS AND THE "HIRED GUN": THE FACT THAT EXPERTS WERE VERY EXPENSIVE (AND FEES WERE FIXED IN RETROSPECT) DID NOT MAKE THEM UNRELIABLE

THE EXPERT WITNESS AND THE “HIRED GUN”: THE FACT THAT EXPERTS WERE VERY EXPENSIVE (AND FEES WERE FIXED IN RETROSPECT) DID NOT MAKE THEM UNRELIABLE

June 3, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In O’Leary v Mercy University Hospital Cork Ltd [2019] IESC 48 the Supreme Court of Ireland made some telling observations on the role of the expert witness. Problems with experts are clearly not confined to one jurisdiction. OPENING OBSERVATIONS OF…

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (4): THE SINGLE JOINT  EXPERT IS NOT A DEMIGOD

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (4): THE SINGLE JOINT EXPERT IS NOT A DEMIGOD

June 2, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

This blog looked recently at the case of O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23 where the trial judge was critical of a jointly instructed expert’s attempt to find facts and state that something was “proven by overwhelming evidence”.  That case contains…

THE APPOINTMENT OF A SINGLE JOINT EXPERT DOES NOT DISPLACE THE TRIAL JUDGE: EXPERTS SHOULD NOT "OVERREACH"

THE APPOINTMENT OF A SINGLE JOINT EXPERT DOES NOT DISPLACE THE TRIAL JUDGE: EXPERTS SHOULD NOT “OVERREACH”

June 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In O v B-M [2019] EWFC B23 Mr Recorder Allen QC noted that a Single Joint Expert had gone beyond their remit in making findings of “fact”.   The parties do not “abdicate” findings to a single joint experts and the…

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (3): THE INSTRUCTION OF EXPERTS: THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL GUIDANCE

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (3): THE INSTRUCTION OF EXPERTS: THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL GUIDANCE

May 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are returning to the Civil Justice Council “Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims”. This time the guidance on the instruction of experts. Remember this guidance is incorporated into the rules.  It provides a essential information as…

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (2): THE APPOINTMENT OF EXPERTS: THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL GUIDANCE

May 31, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The importance of the guidance given by the Civil Justice Council  “Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims” is often overlooked.  Not only are few people aware of exist of the guidance, fewer still are aware that it…

← Previous 1 … 4 5 6 … 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 16.8K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • COST BITES 375 : WHY THESE INTERIM BILLS WERE NOT STATUTORY BILLS: “VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE WOULD BE NEEDED TO ESTABLISH THAT AN INVOICE WHICH, ON ITS FACE, IS EXPRESSLY NOT FINAL HAS NONETHELESS BEEN AGREED TO BE FINAL”
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE “ON DEMAND”
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)

Top Posts

  • WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE AGAINST SOLICITORS WHEN THEY WERE MISTAKEN AS TO WHO THEY WERE INSTRUCTED BY: THE DEFENDANT ESTABLISHES CAUSATION
  • THE JUDGE FOUND AGAINST ME BECAUSE THEY GAVE TOO MUCH LEEWAY TO A LITIGANT IN PERSON : ALLEGATIONS OF THIS KIND SHOULD BE PARTICULARISED (AND CAREFULLY THOUGHT OUT)
  • SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: THE RELEVANCE OF DELAY AND THE DENTON PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED IN THE HIGH COURT
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..
  • MAZUR(ISH) MATTERS 59: UNQUALIFIED PERSON NOT ALLOWED TO REPRESENT PARKING COMPANY AT A SMALL CLAIMS HEARING

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.