header-logo header-logo

Expert witness: Double trouble?

12 August 2020 / Sheena Parry
Issue: 7899 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail
25789
One examination, two experts, several problems. Sheena Parry reports

In brief

  • Is a joint examination a meeting of the experts under the CPR or is it an opportunity for one party to gain information without following Pre Action Protocol?

Mr Justice Tomlin in Graigola Merthyr Co Ltd v Swansea Corporation [1928] 1 Ch 31 stated:

‘Long cases produce evils… In every case of this kind there are generally many irreducible and stubborn facts upon which agreement between experts should be possible, and in my judgement the expert advisers of the parties, whether legal or scientific, are under a special duty to the court in the preparation of such a case to limit in every possible way the contentious matters of fact to be dealt with at the hearing. That is a duty which exists notwithstanding that it may not always be easy to discharge.’

Lord Woolf said, in the Interim Report of his Inquiry into the Civil Justice System the system was still failing to encourage the narrowing of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Payne Hicks Beach—Craig Parrett

Payne Hicks Beach—Craig Parrett

Insolvency and restructuring practice welcomes new partner

Muckle LLP—Phoebe Gogarty

Muckle LLP—Phoebe Gogarty

North East firm welcomes employment specialist

Browne Jacobson—Colette Withey

Browne Jacobson—Colette Withey

Partner joins commercial and technology practice

NEWS
In this week's NLJ, Sophie Houghton of LexisPSL distils the key lesson from recent costs cases: if you want to exceed guideline hourly rates (GHR), you must prove why
With chronic underfunding and rising demand leaving thousands without legal help, technology could transform access to justice—if handled wisely, writes Professor Sue Prince of the University of Exeter in this week's NLJ
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) has restated a fundamental truth, writes John Gould, chair of Russell-Cooke, in this week's NLJ: only authorised persons can conduct litigation. The decision sparked alarm, but Gould stresses it merely confirms the Legal Services Act 2007
The government’s decision to make the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) the Single Professional Services Supervisor marks a watershed in the UK’s fight against money laundering, says Rebecca Hughes of Corker Binning in this week's NLJ. The FCA will now oversee 60,000 firms across legal and accountancy sectors—a massive expansion of remit that raises questions over resources and readiness 
The High Court's decision in Parfitt v Jones [2025] EWHC 1552 (Ch) provided a striking reminder of the need to instruct the right expert in retrospective capacity assessments, says Ann Stanyer of Wedlake Bell in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll