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
THIS IS NOT EXPERT OPINION BUT "ARGUMENTS" SAYS THE JUDGE: PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT NOT GIVEN

THIS IS NOT EXPERT OPINION BUT “ARGUMENTS” SAYS THE JUDGE: PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT NOT GIVEN

November 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Norman v N & CJ Horton Property [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch) Master Clark found that proposed “expert evidence” was not evidence at all but simply opinions.  The person preparing the report was not allowed to give expert evidence on…

NINE YEARS ON IX: 2022: EXPERTS, STRIDENT LANGUAGE AND THE DUTY OWED TO THE COURT

NINE YEARS ON IX: 2022: EXPERTS, STRIDENT LANGUAGE AND THE DUTY OWED TO THE COURT

July 12, 2022 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In the final post of this series I have chosen a post from January 2022.  There are many common themes on this blog: relief from sanctions; service of the claim form; Part 36; witness statements, among them. However it is…

"IT IS NOT FOR AN EXPERT TO DISREGARD THE INSTRUCTIONS THEY HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE COURT AND THE PARTY INSTRUCTING THEM AND TO THEREBY WHOLE SCALE IGNORE EVIDENCE WHICH DOES NOT SUPPORT THEIR OPINION" (ANOTHER CASE ON EXPERTS...)

“IT IS NOT FOR AN EXPERT TO DISREGARD THE INSTRUCTIONS THEY HAVE RECEIVED FROM THE COURT AND THE PARTY INSTRUCTING THEM AND TO THEREBY WHOLE SCALE IGNORE EVIDENCE WHICH DOES NOT SUPPORT THEIR OPINION” (ANOTHER CASE ON EXPERTS…)

June 15, 2022 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have another example of expert witnesses being criticised by the court in the judgment of HHJ Claire Jackson in Davies-Gilbert v Goacher [2022] EWHC 969 (Ch).   “it is not for an expert to disregard the instructions they have…

JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION TO ADJOURN AND NOT TO ALLOW SINGLE WITNESS IN PLACE OF JOINT WITNESS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

JUDGE WAS RIGHT TO REFUSE CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION TO ADJOURN AND NOT TO ALLOW SINGLE WITNESS IN PLACE OF JOINT WITNESS: HIGH COURT DECISION TODAY

September 7, 2020 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Members Content

In Hinson v Hare Realizations Ltd (2) [2020] EWHC 2386 (QB)  Mr Justice Martin Spencer refused a claimant’s appeal where it was argued that a trial judge should have adjourned a trial and given the claimant permission to rely on…

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…

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,…

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…

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…

EXPERTS ACTING ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS: A MAJOR PROBLEM AREA: DETAILED CONSIDERATION FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL

EXPERTS ACTING ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS: A MAJOR PROBLEM AREA: DETAILED CONSIDERATION FROM THE UPPER TRIBUNAL

September 13, 2018 · by gexall · in Conduct, Costs, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to  Graham Hain  for pointing out the decision of  the Upper Tribunal (Lands) Chamber in Gardiner & Theobald LLP v Jackson (VO) (RATING – procedure) [2018] UKUT 253 (LC). This specifically relates to experts in the Lands Chamber,…

AN EXPERT'S IMPARTIALITY CAN ONLY BE STRETCHED SO FAR: THE COURTS HAVE SAID THIS TYNE AND TYNE AGAIN

AN EXPERT’S IMPARTIALITY CAN ONLY BE STRETCHED SO FAR: THE COURTS HAVE SAID THIS TYNE AND TYNE AGAIN

September 3, 2018 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to barrister Charles Holland for sending me a copy of the decision of District Judge Meek in Endless Stretch -v- Newcastle County Council. A copy can be found in the link on this page.    This case is…

THE NATURE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS NOT EXPERT EVIDENCE AT ALL - AND OF NO HELP TO ME:  JUDGE NOT IMPRESSED BY "ATTACHMENT THEORY"

THE NATURE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS NOT EXPERT EVIDENCE AT ALL – AND OF NO HELP TO ME: JUDGE NOT IMPRESSED BY “ATTACHMENT THEORY”

June 14, 2018 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

It is rare for the court to reject “expert” evidence placed before it on the grounds that it is not expert evidence at all. This is rarer still now that permission is normally required before expert evidence can be adduced.  It…

EXPERT WITNESS GIVEN "NO WEIGHT AT ALL": FAILURE TO DISCLOSE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST

EXPERT WITNESS GIVEN “NO WEIGHT AT ALL”: FAILURE TO DISCLOSE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST

August 24, 2017 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some interesting passages in the judgment of David Stone (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) in Technomed Ltd & Anor v Bluecrest Health Screening Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 2142 (Ch). Here we look at the judgment…

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
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY (1): ADJOURNMENTS ON THE GROUNDS OF ILL HEALTH: A DETAILED CONSIDERATION (APRIL 2015)
  • MAZUR IN THE COURT OF APPEAL: WEBINAR WITH CHECKLISTS: NOW AVAILABLE "ON DEMAND"
  • 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"
  • AVOIDING THE PITFALLS: DRAFTING SCHEDULES OF DAMAGES: WEBINAR 16th APRIL 2026: WITH SOME INTERESTING QUOTES TO WHET YOUR APPETITE..

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.