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 witness » Page 4
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…

PROVING THINGS 175: WHEN THE TRIAL JUDGE IS ASKED TO CONSIDER THE QUALITY OF CUDDLY TOYS IN COURT: CPR 33.6 AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE

March 2, 2020 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content

There is an interesting reminder of the provisions of CPR 33.6 in the judgment of HHJ Russen QC (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Dowman Imports Ltd v 2 Toobz Ltd (Rev 1) [2020] EWHC 291 (Comm).   The judge…

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…

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…

WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

WHEN SHOULD A JUDGE DRAW ADVERSE INFERENCES DUE TO ABSENT EVIDENCE? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION TODAY

November 29, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment of the Court of Appeal today in Mackenzie v Alcoa Manufacturing (Gb) Ltd [2019] EWCA Civ 2110 makes some important points in relation to civil evidence.  It reviews the law relating to the drawing of adverse inferences due…

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…

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…

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…

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…

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….

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…

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (1): GUIDANCE FROM THE LAWYERIST: "MUCH LIKE A COWBOY HERDING CATTLE"

GUIDANCE ON INSTRUCTING EXPERTS (1): GUIDANCE FROM THE LAWYERIST: “MUCH LIKE A COWBOY HERDING CATTLE”

May 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Instructing expert witnesses is an important step in many actions.  The advantages, and problems, caused by experts are well known and widely reported recently.  This is one of the matters that crosses boundaries and gives rise to common problems across…

WHO IS AN EXPERT? NOW THERE'S A QUESTION: DEFINITIONS OF "EXPERT" CONSIDERED

WHO IS AN EXPERT? NOW THERE’S A QUESTION: DEFINITIONS OF “EXPERT” CONSIDERED

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

The collapse of the “carbon credit fraud” prosecution today because an “expert” was found out to have no actual expertise leads to consideration of how  exactly the courts define an “expert” .  This does not give rise to a straightforward…

EXPERT EVIDENCE, LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: WEBINAR 2nd JULY 2019

EXPERT EVIDENCE, LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: WEBINAR 2nd JULY 2019

May 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Courses, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are more than 500 posts on this blog that deal with, or mention, expert evidence. It is a central feature of much litigation. I am giving a webinar on the relevant law, practice and procedure of experts on the…

WHEN THINGS GO WRONG FOR A DEFENDANT AT TRIAL: FOUR LESSONS FROM ONE CASE: WHEN YOU HAVE AN EXPERT WHO STATES THEY ARE "BIASED"...

WHEN THINGS GO WRONG FOR A DEFENDANT AT TRIAL: FOUR LESSONS FROM ONE CASE: WHEN YOU HAVE AN EXPERT WHO STATES THEY ARE “BIASED”…

May 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Professional negligence,, Witness statements

In Hanbury & Anor v Hugh James Solicitors (a firm) [2019] EWHC 1074 (QB) Mrs Justice Yip found that a firm of solicitors had been negligent in its conduct of a fatal accident case.  There are a number of lessons…

AN "UNFORTUNATE CHANGE OF VIEW" BY AN EXPERT: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A REPORT NOT BEING ROBUST AND CAUSING DIFFICULTY FOR LITIGANTS

AN “UNFORTUNATE CHANGE OF VIEW” BY AN EXPERT: ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF A REPORT NOT BEING ROBUST AND CAUSING DIFFICULTY FOR LITIGANTS

April 24, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Risks of litigation

There have been several posts this month about experts, particularly valuation experts.  There are short passages in the judgment of Chief Master Marsh in  Bakrania & Anor v Shah & Ors [2019] EWHC 949 (Ch)  which provide another example. THE…

THE ASSESSMENT OF EXPERT  WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE EARLIER THE BETTER (PARTICULARLY IF IT COSTS SOMEONE £7.5 MILLION)

THE ASSESSMENT OF EXPERT WITNESS CREDIBILITY: THE EARLIER THE BETTER (PARTICULARLY IF IT COSTS SOMEONE £7.5 MILLION)

April 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Costs, Expert evidence, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Snowden in  Davey v Money & Anor [2019] EWHC 997 (Ch) will, no doubt, be read anxiously by all litigation funders. The judge held that the “Arkin cap” – a limit on the liability of…

WHEN AN EXPERT RELIES ON MATTERS FROM THE INTERNET FOR MATTERS OUTSIDE THEIR EXPERTISE THEN YOUR CASE IS LIKELY TO FALL APART:  THE CIDER HOUSE RULES

WHEN AN EXPERT RELIES ON MATTERS FROM THE INTERNET FOR MATTERS OUTSIDE THEIR EXPERTISE THEN YOUR CASE IS LIKELY TO FALL APART: THE CIDER HOUSE RULES

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

I am returning to the decision of  HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Devon Commercial Property Ltd v Barnett & Anor [2019] EWHC 700 (Ch). Here was are looking at the judge’s view of one of the experts….

GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: JUST BECAUSE THE COURT HAS SAID YOU MAY - IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU WILL: HOW TO FAIL OF YOUR OWN ACCORD

GIVING EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: JUST BECAUSE THE COURT HAS SAID YOU MAY – IT DOESN’T MEAN YOU WILL: HOW TO FAIL OF YOUR OWN ACCORD

March 30, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

Trials are always stressful events for the participants. They require careful preparation and are usually subject to close case management. Imagine the difficulties when you turn up at the trial and the judge says that the evidence you are relying…

YOU SPEND A FORTUNE ON EXPERT WITNESSES AND THEN FIND OUT THAT THEY ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE OR THEIR EVIDENCE ISN'T "EXPERT" AT ALL

YOU SPEND A FORTUNE ON EXPERT WITNESSES AND THEN FIND OUT THAT THEY ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE OR THEIR EVIDENCE ISN’T “EXPERT” AT ALL

March 28, 2019 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are parts of the judgment of HHJ Paul Matthews (sitting as a High Court Judge) in Devon Commercial Property Ltd v Barnett & Anor [2019] EWHC 700 (Ch) that merit close consideration by anyone involved in litigation that (they…

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER:  A FURTHER RECAP : WHAT IS YOUR SYSTEM IF THE WITNESS BLAMES YOU?

WITNESS STATEMENTS AND SELF-PROTECTION FOR THE LAWYER: A FURTHER RECAP : WHAT IS YOUR SYSTEM IF THE WITNESS BLAMES YOU?

March 22, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

This topic follows directly on from  the post yesterday about the significance of the statement of truth. In particular the Court of Appeal’s observation that “the deliberate or reckless making of a false statement in a document verified by a statement…

WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO SIGN A DOCUMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF TRUTH: OR SIGN ONE YOURSELF: BEST READ THIS IF YOU DON'T WANT TO GO TO JAIL

WHEN YOU ASK SOMEONE TO SIGN A DOCUMENT WITH A STATEMENT OF TRUTH: OR SIGN ONE YOURSELF: BEST READ THIS IF YOU DON’T WANT TO GO TO JAIL

March 21, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 goes much further than a warning to errant experts. It contains important observations that must be considered  by the entire profession. Particularly those who draft statements, and those…

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

SHOULD AN ERRANT EXPERT GO TO JAIL? COURT OF APPEAL DECISION: MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT SHOULD LEAD TO JAIL

March 20, 2019 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Zafar [2019] EWCA Civ 392 the Court of Appeal set out clear guidance for courts considering sentencing in  cases relating to reckless contempt on the part of expert witnesses.  A “reckless” statement made…

GIVING NOTICE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO ATTACK AN EXPERT'S CREDIBILITY: ISSUES THAT ARISE WHEN EXPERT'S HAVE PRIOR DEALINGS WITH THE PARTIES

GIVING NOTICE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO ATTACK AN EXPERT’S CREDIBILITY: ISSUES THAT ARISE WHEN EXPERT’S HAVE PRIOR DEALINGS WITH THE PARTIES

March 16, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Hamad M. Aldrees & Partners v Rotex Europe Ltd [2019] EWHC 574 (TCC)  Sir Antony Edwards-Stuart expressed concern about an attack on the credibility of an expert witness.  In that case there was no evidence to support an assertion that…

EXPERTS WHO CAN'T REPORT IN TIME: BETTER READ THIS: IF YOU CAN'T REPORT ON TIME PROBABLY BEST NOT TO TAKE INSTRUCTIONS AT ALL...

EXPERTS WHO CAN’T REPORT IN TIME: BETTER READ THIS: IF YOU CAN’T REPORT ON TIME PROBABLY BEST NOT TO TAKE INSTRUCTIONS AT ALL…

March 12, 2019 · by gexall · in Case Management, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In X and Y (Delay : Professional Conduct of Expert) [2019] EWFC B9 HH Clifford Bellamy (sitting as a Deputy Circuit Judge) made some observations in relation to the role of the expert, particularly when that expert cannot report timeously.  The…

PROVING THINGS 145: WHEN EXPERTS ARE OF NO HELP AT ALL: IT IS THE FACTS THAT WON IT

PROVING THINGS 145: WHEN EXPERTS ARE OF NO HELP AT ALL: IT IS THE FACTS THAT WON IT

March 9, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

I am giving a seminar on “Expert Witnesses and Liability” at the APIL Annual Conference in May.  The judgment of HHJ McKenna (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Al-Iqra & Ors v DSG Retail Ltd [2019] EWHC 429 (QB) gives…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 33: INVALUABLE GUIDANCE ON EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM THE ICCA

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 33: INVALUABLE GUIDANCE ON EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM THE ICCA

March 5, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Useful links

The Inns of Court College of Advocacy has prepared a very useful guide called “Guidance on the preparation, admission and examination of expert evidence”.  It is free of charge and can be downloaded .   This post is just a summary…

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

WHEN EXPERTS REPORT THINGS THAT HAVE NEVER BEEN SAID: IT NEVER GOES WELL (WHEN THEY ARE FOUND OUT AT LEAST)

February 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There was report in the Scottish newspaper The Herald earlier this week about disciplinary proceedings being brought against a doctor who had prepared a “misleading and inaccurate” medical report. In essence the expert reported, as facts, matters that the interviewee…

SHOULD A "RECKLESS" MEDICAL EXPERT GO TO JAIL? WATCH THE ARGUMENTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

SHOULD A “RECKLESS” MEDICAL EXPERT GO TO JAIL? WATCH THE ARGUMENTS IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

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

Last year I wrote about the judgment in Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Khan & Ors [2018] EWHC 2581 (QB). Among other things in that judgment it was found that a medical expert’s recklessness amounted to contempt of court.  The expert…

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 29:  EXPERTS AND FACTS: EXPERTS WHO VENTURE ONTO THE JUDGE'S TERRITORY DON'T USUALLY FARE TOO WELL

CIVIL PROCEDURE BACK TO BASICS 29: EXPERTS AND FACTS: EXPERTS WHO VENTURE ONTO THE JUDGE’S TERRITORY DON’T USUALLY FARE TOO WELL

February 4, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have seen several cases recently where judges have objected, in clear terms, to an expert trying to find “facts”. That is properly a matter for the trial judge.   It is worthwhile looking at the guidance and cases on this…

PROVING THINGS 139: WHEN THE JUDGE HAS TO DECIDE WHETHER ITS ALL BEEN A BIT OF A CRUSH

PROVING THINGS 139: WHEN THE JUDGE HAS TO DECIDE WHETHER ITS ALL BEEN A BIT OF A CRUSH

February 1, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Witness statements

Most  of the cases looked at in this series are decisions in the High Court. However issues of witness credibility and accuracy are a constant issue throughout virtually every layer of court and tribunal. In Prosser v British Airways Plc [2018]…

LITIGATORS KEEP A CAREFUL LOOK OUT: ITS YOUR DUTY TO MONITOR YOUR EXPERT'S CONDUCT (OTHERWISE ITS YOUR CLIENT THAT SUFFERS)

LITIGATORS KEEP A CAREFUL LOOK OUT: ITS YOUR DUTY TO MONITOR YOUR EXPERT’S CONDUCT (OTHERWISE ITS YOUR CLIENT THAT SUFFERS)

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One specific aspect of the judgment in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) that needs emphasising is the duty the case places on a litigant’s lawyers to monitor the conduct of an expert and…

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT'S APPROACH LEADS TO "SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT'S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT": A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ - NOW

INTRANSIGENT EXPERT’S APPROACH LEADS TO “SIGNIFICANT PART OF CLAIMANT’S CASE BEING STRUCK OUT”: A CASE FOR EVERY EXPERT AND LITIGATOR TO READ – NOW

January 23, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions, Striking out

The judgment of Mr Justice Males in Mayr & Ors v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm) is one of the most robust I have seen in relation to expert evidence. An expert’s failure to properly engage…

EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

EXPERTS IN THE FAMILY COURT: PERMISSION TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE REFUSED

January 18, 2019 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I usually look at cases in the family courts when there are judgments that may be of some interest to civil litigators.  The judgment  of Mr Justice Keehan in M v Derbyshire County Council & Ors [2018] EWHC 3734 (Fam) …

← Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 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

  • ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?
  • PROVING THINGS 286: THE CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE: YOU LOST US $715 MILLION IN TWO YEARS BUT THAT WAS BECAUSE YOU DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE BUSINESS YOU WERE BUYING
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 66: WHEN THE CLAIMANT TRIES TO ADVANCE ALLEGATIONS NOT STATED IN THE STATEMENT OF CASE THOSE MATTERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE JUDGE
  • PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026 (UPDATED)
  • “GUIDE, MENTOR AND FRIEND”: REVIEW OF THE APIL GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS 4th EDITION: STUART McKECHNIE KC (AND A FORMIDABLE TEAM): THE “LITTLE GEM” THAT KEEPS ON GIVING

Top Posts

  • PRACTICE NOTE FROM THE CHANCELLOR OF THE HIGH COURT: NEW REQUIREMENTS FOR SUMMARY ASSESSMENT FROM 14th APRIL 2026 (UPDATED)
  • "GUIDE, MENTOR AND FRIEND": REVIEW OF THE APIL GUIDE TO CATASTROPHIC INJURY CLAIMS 4th EDITION: STUART McKECHNIE KC (AND A FORMIDABLE TEAM): THE "LITTLE GEM" THAT KEEPS ON GIVING
  • ACCEPTANCE OF A PART 36 OFFER WHILST AN APPLICATION TO REALLOCATE THE CASE FROM BAND 2 TO BAND 1 IS PENDING: CAN THE COURT STILL PROCEED TO REALLOCATE?
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THE COMMERCIAL COURT REPORT AND WITNESS STATEMENTS: PD57AC WAS FIVE YEARS OLD THIS MONTH - STILL GUIDANCE IS NEEDED
  • THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 66: WHEN THE CLAIMANT TRIES TO ADVANCE ALLEGATIONS NOT STATED IN THE STATEMENT OF CASE THOSE MATTERS ARE NOT CONSIDERED BY THE JUDGE

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.