Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Experts » Page 3
BACK TO THE CASE OF WILSON: THIS TIME THE "CHERRY PICKING" EXPERT  WHO VEERED INTO A PARTISAN APPROACH

BACK TO THE CASE OF WILSON: THIS TIME THE “CHERRY PICKING” EXPERT WHO VEERED INTO A PARTISAN APPROACH

September 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

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

WHEN AN EXPERT HAS “LOST ALL INDEPENDENCE AND OBJECTIVITY” – AND ADMITS SO IN COURT

September 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

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

PROVING THINGS 244: WHERE THERE IS A “GENUINE DIFFERENCE OF OPINION” BETWEEN EXPERTS : CLAIMANT FAILS TO ESTABLISH LIABILITY IN A CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE CASE

September 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Clinical Negligence, Credibility of experts, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

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"

CLAIMANT’S (LATE) APPLICATION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE DISMISSED:”LITIGATION NEEDS TO BE CONDUCTED EFFICIENTLY AND AT PROPORTIONATE COST”

September 6, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

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

September 5, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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

“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

September 3, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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"

A TRIAL BUNDLE THAT WAS A “CHAOTIC MESS”; NON COMPLIANT WITNESS STATEMENTS AND EXPERT REPORTS AND “PROCEDURAL TRENCH WARFARE”

August 29, 2024 · by gexall · in Bundles, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Experts, Members Content

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..."

IT IS “ESSENTIAL THAT JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERTS ARE ABLE AND WILLING TO ENGAGE WITH COUNTERVAILING ARGUMENTS…”

July 31, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

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…

“THE EXTENT OF EVIDENCE… WENT FAR BEYOND THAT PERMITTED BY THE RULES IN RELATION TO EXPERT EVIDENCE”: COMMENTS FROM ANTOTHER JURISDICTION

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

On the rare occasions we look at procedure in jurisdictions outside England and Wales it is often in relation to expert evidence.  Other jurisdictions have similar issues in relation to experts, particularly argumentative experts.  An example can be seen in…

THE JOINT MEETING OF EXPERTS AND THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: WEBINAR 29th JULY 2024

THE JOINT MEETING OF EXPERTS AND THE JOINTLY INSTRUCTED EXPERT: WEBINAR 29th JULY 2024

July 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

I was a more than a little shocked to read the judgment in Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 it is a case that shows that lawyers are still making…

WHEN EXPERTS KNOW EACH OTHER AND SPEAK AT THE SAME CONFERENCES: ATTACKS ON THE CREDIBILITY OF THE EXPERTS WERE REJECTED

WHEN EXPERTS KNOW EACH OTHER AND SPEAK AT THE SAME CONFERENCES: ATTACKS ON THE CREDIBILITY OF THE EXPERTS WERE REJECTED

July 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some interesting observations about expert witness evidence in the judgment in Biggadike v El Farra & Anor [2024] EWHC 1688 (KB)   Firstly in relation to the attendance at clinical seminars (during the course of the trial). Secondly in relation to…

AN EXPERT WHO SHOULD LEARN THE RULES BEFORE REPORTING AGAIN: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

AN EXPERT WHO SHOULD LEARN THE RULES BEFORE REPORTING AGAIN: CLAIMANT COMES TO GRIEF

July 2, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Fundamental Dishonesty, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are taking a short break from the detailed examination of issues relating to service of the claim form to look at another common issue on this blog – an expert that failed to comply with the rules.  I am…

EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN EXAMPLE OF AN EXPERT BEING UNBALANCED (FROM 2015).

EXPERT EVIDENCE: AN EXAMPLE OF AN EXPERT BEING UNBALANCED (FROM 2015).

June 25, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Looking back at previous posts there are, numerous, indeed hundreds, where the courts have considered the role of experts.  The cases that appear on this blog tend to be where judges have found the experts wanting.  It almost feels unfair…

EXPERT EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL STATE WHY THE JUDGE SHOULD BE WARY OF RELYING ON SCIENTIFIC PAPERS

EXPERT EVIDENCE: COURT OF APPEAL STATE WHY THE JUDGE SHOULD BE WARY OF RELYING ON SCIENTIFIC PAPERS

June 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In D and A (Fact-Finding : Research Literature) [2024] EWCA Civ 663 the Court of Appeal set out a clear warning about the dangers of trial judges analysing research literature in detail. The literature should be read through the prism…

UNCONTROVERTED EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO OVERRIDE THE UNQUESTIONED REPORT: GRIFFITHS -v- TUI LEADS TO CLAIMANTS BEING SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL

UNCONTROVERTED EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE TRIAL JUDGE WAS NOT ENTITLED TO OVERRIDE THE UNQUESTIONED REPORT: GRIFFITHS -v- TUI LEADS TO CLAIMANTS BEING SUCCESSFUL ON APPEAL

June 11, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

I am grateful to Jatinder Paul from Irwin Mitchell for sending me a copy of the decision of HHJ Humphreys in the Wrexham County Court.  The report involves a personal injury case alleging negligence which led to food poisoning which…

EXPERT EVIDENCE, ADJOURNMENTS, CAPACITY AND APPLICATIONS TO COMMIT FOR CONTEMPT: COURT OF APPEAL UPHOLDS DECISION AT FIRST INSTANCE

May 24, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Committal proceedings, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v Khan & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 53 the Court of Appeal considered the issue of expert evidence in relation to capacity, in the context of applications for contempt of court.  It was held that…

THE REAL DANGER OF LAWYERS GETTING INVOLVED IN THE JOINT STATEMENT OF EXPERTS: IT IS WRONG AND IT IS COSTLY: A CASE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT

THE REAL DANGER OF LAWYERS GETTING INVOLVED IN THE JOINT STATEMENT OF EXPERTS: IT IS WRONG AND IT IS COSTLY: A CASE THAT ILLUSTRATES THE POINT

May 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 (TCC) Mr Simon Lofthouse K.C., sitting as a High Court Judge, considered the issues that arose when a party had tried to influence…

COST BITES 153: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE BREAKDOWN OF MEDICAL REPORT FEES ONGOING SAGA: THE INVOICE SHOULD PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN

COST BITES 153: ANOTHER ROUND IN THE BREAKDOWN OF MEDICAL REPORT FEES ONGOING SAGA: THE INVOICE SHOULD PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN

May 23, 2024 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to Simon Fisher from DWF for providing me with a copy of the judgment of Senior Costs Judge Gordon-Saker in CXR -v- Dome Holdings Limited, a copy of the judgment is available here    CXR v Dome…

CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND HINTS

CROSS-EXAMINING EXPERTS: USEFUL GUIDES AND HINTS

May 15, 2024 · by gexall · in Advocacy, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are hundreds of posts on this blog about the role of experts in civil litigation. In many of those cases the experts have been cross-examined and this has not ended well – for them.   I have already planned a…

IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT'S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT - BUT UNDECIDED

IS A PARTY ENTITLED TO SEE THEIR OPPONENT’S CORRESPONDENCE WITH AN EXPERT LEADING UP TO THE JOINT MEETING? AN ISSUE THAT IS IMPORTANT – BUT UNDECIDED

May 7, 2024 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Civil evidence, Disclosure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Frasers Group plc v Saxo Bank AS & Anor [2024] EWHC 188 (Comm) HHJ Pelling KC considered issues relating to whether a party’s correspondence with their expert leading up to the joint meeting of experts should be disclosed.  The…

PROVING THINGS 237: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE, FAILS TO PROVE IT HAD SUFFERED DAMAGES HAD IT SUCCEEDED (SOMETHING ABOUT EXPERT EVIDENCE TOO)

PROVING THINGS 237: CLAIMANT FAILS TO PROVE ITS CASE, FAILS TO PROVE IT HAD SUFFERED DAMAGES HAD IT SUCCEEDED (SOMETHING ABOUT EXPERT EVIDENCE TOO)

February 13, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Hamsard One Thousand And Forty-Three Ltd v AE Insurance Brokers Ltd [2024] EWHC 262 (Comm) the claimant failed to establish its case.  The judgment shows  many issues with the claimant’s evidence, in particular the problems that flowed from issues…

CHANGES TO THE FIXED COSTS RULES 2: 20 PAGES IN AN EXPERT'S REPORT DOES NOT MEAN 20 PAGES

CHANGES TO THE FIXED COSTS RULES 2: 20 PAGES IN AN EXPERT’S REPORT DOES NOT MEAN 20 PAGES

February 9, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Another change being introduced on the 6th April 2024 is a change (or possibly clarification) in relation to to the number of pages in an expert report in the Intermediate Track.  The substantive report is still limited to 20 pages….

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: ESSENTIAL POINTS FOR PRACTITIONERS AND EXPERTS: WEBINAR 24th JANUARY 2024

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: ESSENTIAL POINTS FOR PRACTITIONERS AND EXPERTS: WEBINAR 24th JANUARY 2024

January 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

Keen readers will note that already this week there have been two cases reported on this blog where the conduct or “expertise” of experts have been subject to judicial criticism.  Issues relating to expert evidence in litigation have been a…

EXPERTS NOT QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE MATTERS THEY DID: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION

EXPERTS NOT QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE MATTERS THEY DID: ADMINISTRATIVE COURT DECISION

January 18, 2024 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Another example of expert evidence going awry can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Ritchie in Balachandra v The General Dental Council [2024] EWHC 18 . The experts in question were giving evidence in relation to matters that…

“AN EXPERT WITNESS IS NOT HELPING THE COURT BY TRYING TO MAKE THE EVIDENCE FIT THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS”: JUDGE FINDS EXPERT “UNPROFESSIONAL AND UNACCEPTABLE”

January 17, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In LCC v V & B [2023] EWFC 268 HHJ Booth commented on one of the expert witnesses.  He found that the evidence given involved conjecture.  The criticism of the expert is robust.   “An expert witness is not helping…

MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE: LOOKING BACK TO THE CASE OF THE YEAR 2019

MR BATES AND THE POST OFFICE: LOOKING BACK TO THE CASE OF THE YEAR 2019

January 2, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Yesterday I noticed that a post I had written in 2019 was suddenly gaining a lot of readers.  I suspect that this was due to the power of television.  Not that the blog was being advertised, but that the series…

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: WEBINAR 24TH JANUARY 2024: ESSENTIAL ISSUES FOR ALL LITIGATORS AND EXPERTS

EXPERTS IN THE COURTS IN 2023: WEBINAR 24TH JANUARY 2024: ESSENTIAL ISSUES FOR ALL LITIGATORS AND EXPERTS

November 28, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Webinar

Over the course of 2023 we saw many cases in which the conduct of experts and those who instruct them came under close scrutiny  and criticism in the courts.  I am presenting a webinar on the 24th January 2024 reviewing…

DECISION TO DISMISS CLAIM BECAUSE OF ABSENCE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD ON APPEAL:

DECISION TO DISMISS CLAIM BECAUSE OF ABSENCE OF EXPERT EVIDENCE UPHELD ON APPEAL:

November 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are looking at the second part of the decision in  Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB). The post yesterday looked at the decision in Doyle. Here we look at the judgment in Rowe, the other case…

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON'T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON'T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

LITIGATORS: IF YOU DON’T PAY YOUR EXPERTS AND THEY ARE NOT COMING TO TRIAL, DON’T BE SURPRISED IF YOUR ACTION FAILS

October 31, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in  Doyle v HDI Global Specialty SE [2023] EWHC 2722 (KB) shows a surprising set of facts when an expert wrote directly to the court.  The expert made it clear that he was not…

CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE:  THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)

CLAIMANTS NOT GIVEN PERMISSION TO RELY ON EXPERT EVIDENCE: THE EVIDENCE WOULD NOT ASSIST THE COURT IN ITS TASK (WITH A FEW OTHER REASONS)

October 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Wambura & Ors v Barrick TZ Ltd & Anor [2023] EWHC 2582 (KB) Master Stevens rejected the claimants’ application to call an expert.  The judge contains a detailed consideration of the law and authorities relating to the court’s discretion…

PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE

PARTY NOT PERMITTED TO ADDUCE EXPERT EVIDENCE FROM OTHER CASES AS HEARSAY EVIDENCE

October 3, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

One of the issues decided by Mr Justice Mellor in Crypto Open Patent Alliance v Wright [2023] EWHC 2408 (Ch) related to the attempts by a party (COPA) to adduce expert evidence from other trials by way of hearsay evidence…

AN EXPERT SHOULD HAVE EXPERTISE IN THE ISSUE THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE ON: THEY CAN'T SIMPLY TEACH THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CASE

AN EXPERT SHOULD HAVE EXPERTISE IN THE ISSUE THEY ARE GIVING EVIDENCE ON: THEY CAN’T SIMPLY TEACH THEMSELVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF THE CASE

September 27, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are some important observations on expert evidence in the judgment of Mrs Justice Bacon in Sycurio Ltd v PCI-Pal PLC & Anor [2023] EWHC 2161 (Pat). An expert must give evidence within the scope of their expertise.  To assert…

PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM "MUST" TO "MORE THAN PROBABLE" REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE

PROVING THINGS 232: CAR FIRES AND EXPERT EVIDENCE: WHY EXPERTS SHOULD MIND THEIR LANGUAGE: A MOVE FROM “MUST” TO “MORE THAN PROBABLE” REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE

September 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The judgment of Mr Justice Freedman in Nash v Volskwagen Financial Services (UK) Ltd [2023] EWHC 2326 (KB) contains  important observations in relation to the law and evidence relating to causation.  However I want to look at the judge’s consideration…

COST BITES 98: THE SIMILARITIES IN MEDICAL REPORTS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE COSTS OF REPORTS

COST BITES 98: THE SIMILARITIES IN MEDICAL REPORTS SHOULD BE REFLECTED IN THE COSTS OF REPORTS

August 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Assessment of Costs, Clinical Negligence, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We are returning again to HD v Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust [2023] EWHC 2118 (SCCO) Costs Judge James considered the sums that should be allowed in relation to the claimants’ medical reports.  This involved a close examination of the reports…

WHEN THE PARTIES COULD NOT AGREE WHO THE JOINT EXPERT SHOULD BE: FAILURE TO ENGAGE COST THE CLAIMANT

WHEN THE PARTIES COULD NOT AGREE WHO THE JOINT EXPERT SHOULD BE: FAILURE TO ENGAGE COST THE CLAIMANT

August 9, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Case Management, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I cannot remember many judgments where the sole issue has been who the jointly instructed expert should be.  However we have such a case in the judgment of Mr Nicholas Thompsell (sitting as a High Court judge) in  Gheewalla v…

PROVING THINGS 231: "WITNESS STATEMENTS" THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT

PROVING THINGS 231: “WITNESS STATEMENTS” THAT ARE IN FACT EXPERT REPORTS: IDENTICAL PASSAGES IN WITNESS STATEMENTS: THIS DOES NOT END WELL FOR THE PARTY IN DEFAULT

August 1, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Members Content, Uncategorized, Witness statements

In Cheshire Estate and legal Limited -v- Blanchfield & Others*  HHJ Bever, sitting as a Judge of the High Court, considered witness statements  served by the claimant that failed to comply with the Practice Direction. One was expert evidence posing…

EXPERTS AND THE COURTS: THE DUTY TO INFORM EXPERTS OF CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES: THE EXPERT’S DUTY TO INFORM THE COURT AND PARTIES OF A CHANGE OF VIEWS

July 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

We are looking again at the judgment of Mr Justice Cotter in Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB)  (A copy of the judgment, on Old Square Chambers website, is available here.)  Again we are looking at the judge’s comments…

EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: "A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE... WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED"

EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS SHOULD BE SCRUTINISED AND NOT SIMPLY TRANSPOSED INTO SCHEDULES: “A CARE EXPERT SHOULD BE ABLE TO FULLY JUSTIFY ANY ASPECT OF CARE… WHICH THE COURT IS BEING ADVISED SHOULD BE PROVIDED”

July 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Damages, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

In Scarcliffe -v- Bramton Valley Group Ltd [2023] EWHC 1565 (KB) Mr Justice Cotter sent out another warning about the inadequate state of expert reports.  Here we look at the judgment in relation to the care experts. (A copy of…

BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL:  THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND

BE CAREFUL WHEN INSTRUCTING AN EXPERT: TEST THEIR EVIDENCE BEFORE TRIAL: THE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR CLIENTS COULD BE PROFOUND

June 8, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Costs, Credibility of experts, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

We have looked at the decision in relation to costs in the case of ABC & Ors v Derbyshire County Council & Anor [2023] EWHC 986 (KB) in an earlier post.  The decision on costs, and the primary judgment on…

WHEN AN EXPERT DECLAIMS A POINT "WITH A LEVEL OF SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY": BUT THE HANDWRITING SAMPLE WAS NOT FROM THE CLAIMANT

WHEN AN EXPERT DECLAIMS A POINT “WITH A LEVEL OF SCIENTIFIC CERTAINTY”: BUT THE HANDWRITING SAMPLE WAS NOT FROM THE CLAIMANT

May 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

There are plenty of examples of difficulties with expert’s giving evidence on this blog.  Another example  of problematic expert report can be seen in the judgment of Mr Justice Saini in  Packham v Wightman & Ors [2023] EWHC 1256 (KB)….

COST BITES 84: MEDICAL AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF ITS BILL TO SHOW WHAT THE EXPERT WAS PAID: DECISION ON APPEAL

COST BITES 84: MEDICAL AGENCY MUST PROVIDE A BREAKDOWN OF ITS BILL TO SHOW WHAT THE EXPERT WAS PAID: DECISION ON APPEAL

May 25, 2023 · by gexall · in Appeals, Assessment of Costs, Costs, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

I am grateful to my colleague Paul Hughes for providing me with a copy of the judgment of HHJ Bird in Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust -v- Hoskin, County Court at Manchester22nd May 2023, a copy is available here  HoskinsAppealJudgment. …

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

THE KING’S BENCH DIVISION GUIDE: THE NEW BITS (1): LAWYERS STAY OUT OF THE MEETING OF EXPERTS

May 22, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

A new edition of the King’s Bench Division Guide was published last week (although it is dated March 2023).  I will take a short look at the major changes. Firstly looking at a new passage in relation to the instruction…

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 5th JUNE 2023

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: LEARNING FROM RECENT CASES: WEBINAR 5th JUNE 2023

May 15, 2023 · by gexall · in Liability, Members Content, Personal Injury, Webinar

Contributory negligence is one of those issues that play a daily part of the life of the personal injury practitioner.  The basic principles  underlying findings of contributory negligence are rarely explored, however these can have profound practical implications for the…

BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE

BEWARE OF OVER-EAGER EXPERTS: AN EXPERT THAT SIMPLY ADDRESSES THE POINTS THAT SUPPORTS THEIR HYPOTHESIS IS HEADING FOR TROUBLE

April 26, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In Rowbottom v The Estate of Peter Howard, Deceased & Anor [2023] EWHC 931 (KB) HHL Sephton KC (sitting as a High Court Judge) was critical of the role of one of the experts in the case. “A second reason…

EXPERT WITNESS OBTAINS ANONYMITY: BUT THEIR TONE DEMONSTRATED DISRESPECT FOR THE COURT

EXPERT WITNESS OBTAINS ANONYMITY: BUT THEIR TONE DEMONSTRATED DISRESPECT FOR THE COURT

April 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Uncategorized

An earlier post dealt with the judge’s decision in M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC.  However there is a subsequent judgment that demonstrates an extraordinary response on the part of the expert involved.  In a second judgment,  M v F &…

PARTS OF THE EXPERT'S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT

PARTS OF THE EXPERT’S REPORT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A RED FLAG TO LAWYERS: JUDGE CONSIDERS WHETHER THE PARTIES HAD INSTRUCTED THE CORRECT EXPERT

April 12, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In M v F & Anor [2022] EWFC 186 Recorder Reed set out the importance of an expert knowing, and complying with, the rules relating to the presentation of expert evidence.  The judgment also emphasises the importance of the lawyers…

COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS

COURT GRANTS PERMISSION TO CLAIMANTS TO CHANGE EXPERTS: BUT WITH CONDITIONS

April 11, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

The principles relating to the court granting permission to a party to change expert were considered in detail by Mrs Justice O’Farrell in  Avantage (Cheshire) Ltd & Ors v GB Building Solutions Ltd & Ors [2023] EWHC 802 (TCC).  The…

HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT'S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED

HANDWRITING EXPERTS COME UNDER THE MICROSCOPE: CLAIMANT’S EVIDENCE NOT ACCEPTED

April 4, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

Issues relating to handwriting experts comprise a surprisingly large percentage of the search terms that lead to this blog.  The question of the quality of such experts was considered by Master Clark in Watts v Watts [2023] EWHC 679 (Ch)….

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT'S APPLICATION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE CAN HANDLE EXPERT WITNESSES AT EVERY POINT OF THE SPECTRUM

COURT REFUSES CLAIMANT’S APPLICATION TO EXCLUDE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT EVIDENCE: A TRIAL JUDGE CAN HANDLE EXPERT WITNESSES AT EVERY POINT OF THE SPECTRUM

March 10, 2023 · by gexall · in Applications, Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content

In  Fawcett & Ors v TUI UK Ltd [2023] EWHC 400 (KB) Mr Dexter Dias KC (setting as a Deputy High Court Judge) refused the claimant’s application to exclude the defendant’s expert evidence.  The matters to which the claimant objected…

SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT'S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT'S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION

SPORTING INJURIES AND CIVIL EVIDENCE: WHEN THE DEFENDANT’S EXPERT CONCEDES THE CLAIMANT’S CASE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION

February 23, 2023 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Expert evidence, Experts, Members Content, Personal Injury

The judgment of Mr Justice Martin Spencer in Czernuszka v King [2023] EWHC 380 (KB) contains important observations in relation to the duty of care owed to those taking place in sporting activities.  It also shows the important role of…

← Previous 1 2 3 4 … 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 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • IF YOU ARE ASKING FOR AN EXPEDITED TRIAL – MAKE SURE YOU ARE AVAILABLE…: JUDGE SAYS THE PARTIES SHOULD HAVE CHECKED THIS ISSUE
  • COST BITES 398: MORE BUDGETING IN THE MERCEDES-BENZ LITIGATION: ONLY A “MODEST” REDUCTION OF £1 MILLION HERE: BUT WHY (THE COURT ASKS) WEREN’T REALISTICALLY REDUCED FIGURES PUT FORWARD IN THE FIRST PLACE?
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: “ADVOCACY – THE JUDGE’S VIEW: “AVOID BULLSHIT, SMOKE AND MIRRORS” (OH AND “WELL PADDED VANITY” (JUNE 2016
  • WHOSE EXPERT EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE ACCEPTED AT TRIAL? (CLINICAL NEGLIGENCE): WEBINAR 10th JUNE 2026
  • COST BITES 397: THE PARTIES THAT SPENT £500,000 IN A DISPUTE THAT WAS WORTH £5,000: THE JUDGE FOUND GOOD REASON TO DEPART FROM THE DEFENDANT’S COSTS BUDGET (A CASE I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERY LITIGATOR TO READ)

Top Posts

  • A FIRM OF SOLICITORS ISSUED PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT AUTHORITY TO DO SO: ORDERED TO PAY £900,000 ON ACCOUNT OF COSTS: SOME EXPENSIVE LESSONS HERE...
  • COST BITES 386: THREATS TO REPORT THE DEFENDANTS' SOLICITORS TO THE SRA WAS ONE OF THE REASONS THE CLAIMANT HAD TO PAY COSTS ON AN INDEMNITY BASIS: WEAPONISERS BEWARE
  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...
  • THROWBACK FRIDAY: LAWYERS FAILURE TO PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF EXPERTS LEADS TO EXCLUSION OF THEIR EVIDENCE: EXPERT EVIDENCE IS “NOT A MATTER OF RIGHT” (MAY 2021)
  • COST BITES 385: THE COURTS SHOULD BE WARY OF DECIDING PRELIMINARY APPLICATIONS AND ISSUES ON A PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT: THIS COULD UNDERMINE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF THE REGIME

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.