IF A CLAIMANT ISSUES AND LITIGATES WHEN THEY DO NOT HAVE CAPACITY – ARE THEY LIABLE FOR THE COSTS INCURRED? COURT OF APPEAL SCRUTINISES EXPERT EVIDENCE AND FINDS IT WANTING
Yesterday we looked at issues relating to the capacity of a solicitor’s client and their consequent liability to pay costs. Today we look at a case about inter partes costs. If a claimant brings proceedings but does not, in fact,…
WHEN A PARTY MAKES A SECOND APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT WITNESS HOW SHOULD THE COURT RESPOND? THE SAGA CONTINUED
We are looking at this case for the third time. There were issues in relation to witness evidence and expert evidence. The problems continued after trial when the judge realised that neither party had addressed her on a mandatory requirement…
IF YOU ARE GOING TO CRITICISE AN EXPERT THIS MUCH YOU SHOULD HAVE RAISED IT AT THE CASE MANAGEMENT HEARING: HIGH COURT REJECTS EACH PARTY’S ATTACKS ON OPPONENT’S EXPERTS
We have seen plenty of cases where the courts have not been slow in their criticism of expert witnesses. Here we have a different situation where the judge was critical of the attacks, by each party, on the credibility of…
HOW FAR IS A TRIAL JUDGE BOUND TO FOLLOW THE VIEWS OF A JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT? WELL – READ THIS FOR SOME TRENCHANT VIEWS…
When the parties jointly instruct an expert how far is the judge “bound” by the views that the expert reaches? This is an issue we are looking at for the second time within 6 days. We have an interesting consideration…
ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL AGENCY/FEE BREAKDOWN CONFLICT: THERE ARE LOTS OF CASES TO CHOOSE FROM…
I am grateful to Express Solicitors for sending me a transcript of a judgment that marks another round in the fee note/medical agency/provide a breakdown conflict. Here we have the judge considering whether a breakdown, incorporating the percentage taken by…
WHEN THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT REPORT IS OF “LITTLE OR NO” ASSISTANCE TO THE COURT: A CASE IN POINT
The courts encourages the use of jointly instructed experts However this does not mean that the case, or even key issues in the case, are necessarily determined by those experts. Here we have a case where the judge held that…
WHICH EXPERT WITNESS IS GOING TO BE PREFERRED? ONE EXPERT TOOK AN “UNREALISTIC APPROACH”
Knowing the reasons why a judge may prefer the evidence of one expert over another is an important part of a litigator’s skill. Each case is, of course, fact specific, but there are clear trends that can be discerned. Here…
SHOULD A PARTY BE ABLE TO INSTRUCT THEIR OWN EXPERT WHEN THEY DISAGREE WITH THE REPORT OF A JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED
Here we are looking at a case where a party, dissatisfied with the approach of a jointly instructed expert, applied to the court for permission to instruct their own expert. The judgment contains a useful summary of the relevant principles….
PART 35 QUESTIONS TO EXPERTS A POINT ABOUT THE CASE LAW: HOW FAR CAN THE QUESTIONS GO? A CLOSE LOOK AT THE COURT OF APPEAL DECISION IN MUTCH
The previous post about when experts should be called to give evidence also contained a consideration of the nature of questions that can be put to experts. One of my colleagues has suggested that the summary relating to the questioning…
WHEN SHOULD PARTIES BE ALLOWED TO CALL EXPERT WITNESSES TO GIVE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL? THE ISSUES CONSIDERED (IN THE FAMILY COURT)
When should the courts permit experts to give evidence at trial? There are few cases on this topic and today we are looking at a decision in the family courts. The case is relevant to civil practitioners in that it…
YOU SPENT £1.2 MILLION ON EXPERTS AND IT WAS MAINLY MONEY DOWN THE DRAIN: DEFENDANTS ALLOWED TO RECOVER 20% OF FEES INCURRED
Sometimes you have to go looking for a pun as a headline for a blog post. Often they simply write themselves. In a case involving water companies who spent £1.2 million on experts, this was one of these cases. The…
EXPERTS IN COURT: “TRESPASSING ON THE JUDICIAL FUNCTION” AND “SEEKING TO ADVOCATE” ON BEHALF OF PARTY: THIS RARELY ENDS WELL…
There is no shortage of posts on this blogs where judges are critical of expert witnesses. Today we look at another such case where the judge found the expert’s approach “concerning” and went on to state that the expert was…
THE COURT DOES NOT REQUIRE EXPERT EVIDENCE TO CONSTRUE A TERM IN AN AGREEMENT: AN EXPERT CANNOT BE USED TO USURP THE FUNCTION OF THE COURT
Is an expert needed to construe a contractual agreement. Here we have a case where the Master was very much against the applicant who sought permission to rely on an expert. An expert was not needed to report on market…
EXPERT EVIDENCE AND THE RISKS OF “ANCHORING”: THE EXPERT “GAVE THE SENSE OF TRYING TO ARGUE THE CLAIMANT’S CASE”
Today we are looking at a case where the judge had considerable reservations about expert evidence called on behalf of a claimant. Not all the problems that occurred were the fault of the expert. However she was the third expert…
THE RICS PRACTICE ALERT ON ACTING AS AN EXPERT WITNESS IN HOUSING DISREPAIR AND OTHER HIGH VOLUME CASES: OF INTEREST TO ALL EXPERTS (AND THOSE WHO INSTRUCT THEM)
The RICS has produced a Practice Alert aimed specifically at those acting as expert witnesses in housing disrepair and other high volume cases. It some ways the Alert is surprising in that it says nothing new, that is most of…
EXPERT REPORTS AND CONDUCT CONSIDERED IN THE COURTS AGAIN: LEADS TO A DOCTOR BEING ERASED FROM THE REGISTER OF DOCTORS
The judgment in Moodliar v General Medical Council [2025] EWHC 913 (Admin) provides a salutary reminder to medical experts that giving expert evidence is a highly significant task. Failures in the process can lead to erasure from the medical register,…
THE JUDGE SHOULD NOT HAVE OVERRIDDEN THE EVIDENCE OF THE (UNCHALLENGED) EXPERT WITNESS: CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO DAMAGES FOR PSYCHIATRIC INJURY
In Sarah Jane Young v John Anthony Downey [2025] EWCA Civ 177 the Court of Appeal sent out another reminder that there are difficulties in trial judges attempting to override the views of expert witnesses. “… in the circumstances…
EXPERT EVIDENCE FOR HOUSING LAWYERS: WEBINAR 14th MAY 2025
I am giving a webinar for the Steve Cornforth Consultance on the 14th May 2025. It is aimed at housing lawyers and aims to have a comprehensive look at the rules, guidance and cases on the use of experts in…
PROVING THINGS 259: WHEN THE COURT REFUSES PERMISSION FOR THE EXPERTS TO GIVE EVIDENCE AT TRIAL: THESE ARE BASICALLY ISSUES OF FACT
In Rajan Marwaha v Director of Border Revenue & Anor [2025] EWHC 869 (KB) Jason Beer KC dismissed the claimant’s application that forensic accountants give evidence at trial. The experts had basically agreed that there were issues of fact to…
EXPERT EVIDENCE: THIS IS JUST ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS: EXPERT CONCEDES THAT PARTS OF THEIR EVIDENCE WAS “APPALLING”: ONE OF THE PARTIES DESCRIBED IT AS “TERRIFYING”
In LB Croydon v D (Critical Scrutiny of the Paedeatric Overview) [2024] EWFC 438 HHJ Kathryn Major (sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge) was severely critical of the medical evidence called by the local authority. That part of the…
PROVING THINGS TWO 257: TWO (PRESUMABLY VERY EXPENSIVE EXPERTS) ON LOSS AND THEY ARE BOTH OF NO HELP TO THE COURT:
In H&P Advisory Limited v Barrick Gold (Holdings) Limited (formerly Randgold Resources Limited) [2025] EWHC 562 (Ch) Mr Simon Gleeson found that the experts for each party were of no assistance in assessing the value of the work done by…
AGENCY FEES AND MEDICAL REPORTS: JUDGE REFUSES TO ALLOW AGENCY PROFIT ELEMENT OF THE FEE: ANOTHER ROUND IN A CONTINUING BATTLE
I am grateful to Howard Dean of Keoghs, solicitors, for sending me a copy of the judgment of District Judge Morris in Smith -v- Portsmouth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, a copy of which is available here. It is a case…
THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 3: EXPERT EVIDENCE WAS NOT NECESSARY, NOT PROPORTIONATE AND DID NOT REALLY RELATE TO THE PLEADED ISSUES
There is a consideration of the principles relating to the use of expert evidence in the judgment of Mr Justice Fancourt in Cohen & Ors v Co-operative Group Ltd & Ors [2025] EWHC 526 (Ch). The judge rejected the claimants’…
AVOIDING PROBLEMS WITH EXPERT WITNESSES: WEBINAR 6th MARCH 2025: DEALS WITH SOME “INTERESTING” ISSUES: EXPERTS BEHAVING BADLY
This webinar deals, among other things, with three cases where solicitors have been struck off the Roll because of their conduct with expert witnesses. In one of those cases the solicitor also went to prison. The Court of Appeal held…
EXPERTS AT TRIAL: THE JUDGE PREFERS THE EXPERT WITH DIRECT PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF THE ISSUE BEING CONSIDERED
In Dobson v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Police [2025] EWHC 272 (KB) HHJ Bird (sitting as a High Court Judge) considered which expert should be accepted in the context of a case against the police. He preferred the expert with…
WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 14th FEBRUARY 2025
Expert evidence plays a critical, often decisive, role in clinical negligence litigation. An ability to assess expert evidence is a key part of the litigator’s role. This webinar looks at the rules and cases that govern the credibility of expert…
CAN AN EXPERT WORK ON A CONDITIONAL FEE BASIS? IT MAY BE POSSIBLE – BUT IS DEFINITELY NOT WISE
I am grateful to Professor Keith Rix for allowing me to use an article that appears in February’s Expert Healthcare Witness Matters*. This deals with the question of whether an expert can, or should, agree to act on a conditional…
WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL (?) PERSONAL INJURY: WEBINAR 7th FEBRUARY 2025
This blog regularly features cases where there have been issues, sometimes major problems, with expert evidence. This webinar takes a close look at the factors that the courts take into account when considering which expert’s view should be accepted. It…
WHEN EXPERT EVIDENCE GOES WRONG : THE IMPORTANCE OF ACCURATE INFORMATION BEING GIVEN TO THE EXPERT
We have looked at the judgment in Aviva Insurance Ltd v Nadeem & Anor [2024] EWHC 3445 (KB) HHJ Tindal (sitting as Judge of the High Court) before, in the context of the failure of committal proceedings following an earlier finding…
COURT REFUSES PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN “INAPPROPRIATE DISTRACTION”: A REPORT WAS “IN FACT LEGAL ARGUMENTS DRESSED UP AS ECONOMIC EXPERTISE”
In Kington SARL v Thames Water Utilities Holdings Ltd (Rev1) [2025] EWHC 84 (Ch) Mr Justice Trower rejected the applicant’s application to rely on expert evidence. The proposed expert report was to “uncertain” and, in any event, unlikely to assist…
COST BITES 207: THE BREAKDOWN OF EXPERT FEES WHEN AN AGENCY IS INVOLVED (AGAIN): THE RECEIVING PARTY, APPLES AND PEARS AND AN ELECTION HAS TO BE MADE
In JXX v Archibald [2025] EWHC 69 (SCCO) Costs Judge Rowley considered the – much debated and litigated – issue of whether there needs to be breakdown of an expert’s fee when the expert is instructed through an agency. The…
CIVIL LITIGATION BRIEF IN 2024: SOME FACTS AND FIGURES
As 2024 draws to a close this is a good time to look back at the year in terms of civil procedure. There have been 463 posts to date this year amounting to 938 thousand words (I haven’t counted them…
AN EXPERT WHO “HAD NO REGARD TO THE PRACTICE DIRECTION” AND “WHO WAS PREPARED MATERIALLY TO MISLEAD THE COURT”
In Rashpal Samrai & Ors v Rajinder Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB) Mr Justice Martin Spencer made extremely trenchant findings about the conduct of an expert witness instructed on behalf of the claimants. There was no compliance with Rules or Guidance for…
EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: DEVELOPMENTS IN 2024: “WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL?”: SOME INTERESTING WEBINARS IN THE NEAR FUTURE
Issues relating to expert evidence have formed a large part of the material considered in this blog so far this year. The webinar on the 11th December reviews the key cases and their significance for practitioners and experts alike. Webinars…
FUNDAMENTAL DISHONESTY: FALSE EVIDENCE: A FALSE CV: “I AM ENTITLED TO REJECT THE EXPERT EVIDENCE IN THIS CASE BECAUSE IT IS BUILT UPON A FALSE FACTUAL BASIS”
I am grateful to Amy Birchall of HF solicitors for sending me a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Scully -v- Atherton (& others). The judge found that the claimant (someone who had held a number of jobs…
THIS IS NOT EXPERT OPINION BUT “ARGUMENTS” SAYS THE JUDGE: PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT NOT GIVEN
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…
COST BITES 198: YET ANOTHER ROUND IN THE MEDICAL REPORT/AGENCY FEE SAGA: CLAIMANT ORDERED TO PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF THE BILL
Hot on the heels of publishing the previous post in relation to the judge’s refusal to order a breakdown of the agency fees involved in a medical report I received a copy of a case from Ben Millns of Kennedys. …
EXPERTS, NEW EVIDENCE AND APPEALS: COURT OF APPEAL DOUBT THE RELIABILITY OF AN EXPERT REPORT
The Court of Appeal decision in T (Fresh Evidence on Appeal) [2024] EWCA Civ 1384 is an appeal in a family court case. It contains important observations in relation to attempts to adduce new evidence at the appeal stage. Equally…
CLAIM AGAINST ALLEGEDLY DISHONEST EXPERT NOT STRUCK OUT: THESE ISSUES SHOULD BE DETERMINED AT TRIAL
In EUI Ltd (t/a Admiral) v Smith [2024] EWHC 2803 (KB) Mr Justice Griffiths refused an expert’s application to strike out the case against him. He upheld the decision of the Circuit Judge and stated that the issues should go…
WHEN AN EXPERT TRIED TO USE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR CALCULATIONS: COPILOT DOESN’T PREVENT THE EVIDENCE CRASHING…
We have considered the dangers of attempting to use artificial intelligence in litigation before. The use of artificial intelligence in an expert report was considered b Schopf.S in the Surrogate’s Court, Saratoga County, in the “Matter of Weber”. “The mere…
EXPERTS CAN BE ASKED TO GIVE AN OPINION ON MATTERS OF FACT, EVEN WHEN THOSE FACTS ARE ULTIMATELY FOR THE COURT
There is a short passage in the judgment of Master Davison in The Owners of the “Christos Theo” v The Owners of the “Aliki” [2024] EWHC 2106 (Admlty) which deals with an issue rarely considered by the courts – how…
AN EXPERT SHOULD NOT HAVE ALLOWED HIS INITIAL ASSESSMENT TO BE “CORRUPTED” BY INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE: “THERE SHOULD BE SOME INTROSPECTION ON THE PART OF THE GOVERNMENT LEGAL DEPARTMENT ABOUT THIS”
We are returning once again to the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB).We are also returning to the question of expert evidence. There…
BACK TO THE CASE OF WILSON: THIS TIME THE “CHERRY PICKING” EXPERT WHO VEERED INTO A PARTISAN APPROACH
We are returning to the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB) and staying with the theme of expert witnesses whose evidence was found wanting. (This…
WHEN AN EXPERT HAS “LOST ALL INDEPENDENCE AND OBJECTIVITY” – AND ADMITS SO IN COURT
There are many interesting aspects of the judgment of HHJ Melissa Clarke (sitting as a judge of the High Court) in Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB). Here I want to concentrate upon the judgment relating to…
PROVING THINGS 244: WHERE THERE IS A “GENUINE DIFFERENCE OF OPINION” BETWEEN EXPERTS : CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE
Many of the cases on this blog that consider experts feature judicial criticism of those experts. Sometimes because of a failure to take into account the duties owed by those experts. However litigation is more complicated than that. It is…
CLAIMANT’S (LATE) APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE DISMISSED:”LITIGATION NEEDS TO BE CONDUCTED EFFICIENTLY AND AT PROPORTIONATE COST”
In IlliquidX Ltd v Altana Wealth Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 2191 (Ch) Chief Master Shuman dismissed the claimant’s application to rely on expert evidence. It was held that the application was made too late and, in any event, not…
THE COUNCIL MUST PAY THE COSTS OF ITS EXPERT’S CHANGE OF MIND: THE DUTY TO TEST THE STRENGTH OF THE CASE WITH AN EXPERT CONSIDERED
There is an interesting consideration of the duties relating to the interplay between lawyer and expert in the judgment of Fordham J in Halton Borough Council, R (On the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and…
“IT IS ENTIRELY OUTSIDE THE REMIT OF AN EXPERT TO DECIDE WHICH WITNESSES OF FACT HE BELIEVES OR DISBELIEVES”: DEFENDANT’S WITNESS DOES NOT FARE WELL
We are returning to the judgment of Mr Justice Julian Knowles in Allard v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd [2024] EWHC 2227 (KB). More accurately to the first instance decision which the defendant attempted (unsuccessfully) to appeal. This time in relation to…
A TRIAL BUNDLE THAT WAS A “CHAOTIC MESS”; NON COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS AND “PROCEDURAL TRENCH WARFARE”
There are interesting procedural aspects in the judgment of Simon Gleeson in Carl v Hawkins & Ors [2024] EWHC 2186 (Ch). The case, about historic sports cars, involved (among other things) “procedural trench warfare”; highly defective bundles; non-compliant witness statements;…
IT IS “ESSENTIAL THAT JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERTS ARE ABLE AND WILLING TO ENGAGE WITH COUNTERVAILING ARGUMENTS…”
There have been a number of cases recently where the courts have considered whether expert evidence should necessarily be accepted in full. In M (A Child)(Non-Accidental Injuries; Wider Canvas), Re [2024] EWFC 209 HHJ Coffey held that the views of…
You must be logged in to post a comment.