DELAY AND SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT: BALD ASSERTIONS IN AN EXPERT'S REPORT
The result in Gahir -v- Bansal [2016] EWHC 2041 (QB) (Sir David Eady) is perhaps surprising given the strength of the judge’s observations as to the defendant’s conduct. Despite major unjustified delay an application to set aside a default judgment…
THE ARROYO JUDGMENT 2: EXPERTS, OH EXPERTS.
This is the second in the series of posts on the judgment of Mr Justice Stuart-Smith in Arroyo -v-Equion Energia Limited [2016] EWHC 1699 TCC. The first looked at the issues that arose from unchecked schedules of damages. Here we look…
EXPERT SHOPPING: CHANGING EXPERTS AND DISCLOSURE OF REPORTS
Suspicions are often aroused when an party wants to change expert mid-way through a case. There is, usually, a requirement that before a court grants permission to instruct a new expert the previous report has to be disclosed. The case…
THE INTERCHANGE BETWEEN LAWYERS & EXPERTS: A DIFFICULT ISSUE
In a week where there is a report of an application being made for a doctor to be committed for contempt* it is prudent to consider that difficult issue of the relationship between the lawyers in a case and the…
EXPERT REPORTS IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT: PART 35 APPLIES
In the judgment today in Khaled -v- Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 857 (Admin) Mr Justice Garnham considered Part 35 of the CPR and the admissibility of expert reports in proceedings in the Administrative Court. “The…
IS THIS AN EXPERT REPORT I SEE BEFORE ME? I THINK NOT
In Al Nehayan -v- Kent [2016] EWHC 623 (QB) Mrs Justice Nicola Davies made observations upon “expert” evidence that had been placed before the court. There were major failures of form as well as of substance. The judgment contains an…
PERMISSION NOT GRANTED TO CALL EMPLOYMENT EXPERTS: THE RELEVANT PRINCIPLES CONSIDERED
In Various Claimants -v- Sir Robert McAlpine [2016] EWHC 45 (QB) Mr Justice Supperstone and Master Leslie considered the rules and case law in relation to the need to call expert witnesses in detail. KEY POINTS The claimants were refused…
THAT DIFFICULT DISTINCTION BETWEEN AN EXPERT WITNESS AND AN ADVOCATE
In AAW -v- The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] UKUT 673 (IAT) Upper Tribunal Judge Southern made some telling observations on the role of an expert. The judgment is of general interest in relation to the role…
WHEN AN EXPERT FAILS TO DISCLOSE THAT THEY KNOW THE PARTIES
A recent high profile criminal case has identified the major problems that can arise when an expert called to give evidence has failed to disclose that they have had previous dealings with the parties. Here we look at how the…
THE EXPERT WITNESS THAT TELLS THE JUDGE THE "FACTS": A REVIEW OF RECENT CASES
There have been a number of recent cases where judges have considered the effect of expert witnesses commenting on primary facts. The judiciary have traditionally, and rightly, guarded their role as primary fact finder. However this does not appear to…
GUIDANCE TO EXPERTS: CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BRITISH DENTAL JOURNAL: WHO DOES AN EXPERT "REPRESENT"?
It is rare that lawyers can look to the British Dental Journal for advice on procedure and evidence. However there is a beautifully phrased letter in the British Dental Journal “reviewing a review”. THE LETTER The writer was commenting on…
CASE MANAGEMENT, NECESSITY AND EXPERTS: BA -v- SPENCER: IS EXPERT EVIDENCE "REASONABLY REQUIRED"?
In his decision today in British Airways Plc -v- Spencer [2015] EWHC 2477 (Ch) Mr Justice Warren made important observations about the need for expert evidence. The judge overturned a case management decision that expert evidence was not necessary and…
ASSESSING EXPERT EVIDENCE: GUIDANCE FROM VICTORIA
There are many cases where a judge has to determine differences between experts. It is helpful for practitioners to know what factors are taken into account when assessing evidence . The Judicial College of Victoria puts all its guidance to…
EXPERT WITNESSES IN INSURANCE CASES 1: INVOLNERT MANAGEMENT
In Involnert Management Inc -v- AIS Insurance Services Limited [2015] EWHC 2225 (Comm) Mr Justice Leggatt considered the evidence of experts in a case between insurer and insured and, more particularly,between the insured and insurance broker. THE CASE The defendants…
COMMITTAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST "EXPERT WITNESSES" ARE NOT AN ABUSE OF PROCESS
The decision of the Divisional Court in Accident Exchange Ltd -v- Nathan John George-Broom & Ors [2015] EWHC 2205 (Admin) is certainly a development in the practice relating to dismissal. THE CASE The claimants applied to commit a number of…
A TRIAL WITHOUT WITNESSES: THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES: DUNNAGE -v- RANDALL
The Court of Appeal decision today in Dunnage -v- Randall [2015] EWCA Civ 673 is one of those seminal cases that every tort law student will have to read. Here we look at the case and the procedure. In particular…
ANOTHER UNSATISFACTORY EXPERT: WITH A WRONG VIEW OF HIS ROLE
In Sinclair -v- Joyner [2015] EWHC Civ 1800 (QB) Mrs Justice Cox made some important observations about the role of the expert and the conduct of the expert instructed by the defendant in that case. THE CASE The claimant was…
CAUSATION AND EVIDENCE – A BURNING PROBLEM? IMPORTANT ISSUES FROM A BIZARRE SET OF FACTS
In Graves -v- Brouwer [2015] EWCA Civ 595 the Court of Appeal carried out an extensive review of the principles and authorities relating to evidence and causation. There is a useful discussion on the role and questioning of experts at…
EXPERT REPORTS: TOO LONG AND NOT MUCH USE: CARE EXPERTS MUST TAKE MORE CARE
In the case of Harman -v- East Kent Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2015] EWHC 1662 (QB) Mr Justice Turner had some very clear criticisms of the expert reports. Some of the comments are of general importance. “Against the background of…
THE MEETING OF EXPERTS: CASE LAW AND GUIDANCE
The case of Cintas Corp No 2 -v- Rhino Developments (2015 Ch D Newey J 10/6/2015) * reported on Lawtel today provides an interesting scenario in relation to the conduct of an expert and joint meetings. There is relatively little…
APPEALING DECISIONS IN RELATION TO EXPERTS: SOME USEFUL EXAMPLES
An earlier post commented on how rare it was for appeals to take place in relation to the instruction of experts. John McQuater of Atherton Godfrey has kindly sent me two examples of appeals on the issue of experts. (Both…
EXPERTS GOING ON A FROLIC: A FAMILY LAW CASE WHERE THE EXPERT WITNESS WAS "THOROUGHLY UNHELPFUL"
The conduct of experts has been considered many times on this blog. There is an interesting example of problems caused in the context of family law in M -v- M [2015] EWFC B63. Here we have an expert going well…
LATE APPLICATION FOR DISCLOSURE AND EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED: STOPPED AT THE DOCK
The judgment of His Honour Judge Stephen Davies in (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in William Clark Partnership Limited -v- Dock St PCT Limited [2015] EWHC B5 (TCC) illustrates the problems caused when applications are made late….
"TOUCH SENSITIVE" WITNESS STATEMENTS AND OTHER FORMS OF EVIDENCE: WHEN THE CLAIMANTS COLLECT THE EVIDENCE THEMSELVES
The decision of Recorder Amanda Michaels (sitting as a Deputy Enterprise Judge) in Minder Music Ltd -v- Sharples [2015] EWHC 1454 (IPEC) raises some interesting issues in relation to witness statements and evidence. In particular the problems when a party…
PERMISSION TO CALL EXPERT WITNESS OVERTURNED ON APPEAL
I cannot recall the last time an appeal took place in relation to the question of permission to call an expert witness. The post yesterday discussed a case where permission to call an expert was upheld. Hot on its heels…
I DIDN'T MEAN IT WHEN I SIGNED THE JOINT REPORT: WHAT HAPPENS WHEN EXPERTS CHANGE THEIR MINDS?
The judgment of Mr Justice Leggatt in Iraqi Civilians -v- Ministry of Defence [2015] EWHC 1254 (QB) contains some interesting passages in relation to an expert reneging from the contents of a joint report. In particular what is the appropriate…
COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS ORDER STRIKING OUT CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO SERVE EXPERT REPORT: DON'T PARK THE LORRY WHEN THE TIDE IS AGAINST YOU
In Elliott -v- Stobart Group Ltd [2015] EWCA Civ 449 the Court of Appeal upheld a decision to strike out an application for damages because of a failure to serve a medical report. “In my judgment Judge Platts was correct…
AN EXPERT MUST DISCLOSE DETAILS OF PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH A PARTY OTHERWISE THE CONSEQUENCES CAN BE DIRE: EXP -v- BARKER
The facts in relation to the Defendant’s expert witness in the case of EXP -v- Barker [2015] EWHC 1289 (QB) are quite remarkable. The case shows the importance of an expert disclosing their history of dealing with the person on…
LAY EVIDENCE AND EXPERT EVIDENCE IN CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE: MORE IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER
In Wake -v- Johnson [2015] EWHC 276(QB) HH Judge Collender QC (Sitting as Judge of the High Court) conducted a critical analysis of the lay evidence and expert evidence when dismissing a clinical negligence claim against a GP. There are…
ADJOURNMENT GRANTED WHEN MEDICAL EXPERT "UNABLE" TO ATTEND: BETTER EVIDENCE NEEDED IN FUTURE
In D -v- the Secretary of State for Health [2015] EWHC 867(QB) Mr Justice Foskett granted the claimant when an important expert was unable to attend for somewhat unusual reasons. The judgment was designed to set out clear guidance for…
EXPERT EVIDENCE ABOUT THE VERACITY OF WITNESSES: WELL, IT IS PROBABLY A WASTE OF TIME
In Wigan Council -v- C [2015] EWFC 8 Mr Justice Peter Jackson raised considerable doubts as to whether an expert report on the potential veracity of child witnesses was of much value to a judge. It is a family case…
THE USE OF EXPERT WITNESSES: STEALING FROM THE CPS
It would be a good idea for those involved in civil litigation to read the Crown Prosecution Service: Guidance on Expert Evidence. Many of the points in that guide apply, with equal force, to instructing experts in civil proceedings. It…
OVER EAGER EXPERTS JUST DO NOT HELP: THEY HINDER AND HARM THE CASES OF THOSE WHO CALL THEM
Several preliminary remarks of HH Simon Barker QC in Bacciotinni & Cook -v- Gotelle & Goldsmith [2014] EWHC 3257 Ch underline the dangers of an “over eager” expert witness making comments which undermine their own evidence and taint the case…
