header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: Crossing the line between expert & factual evidence

11 April 2025
Issue: 8112 / Categories: Legal News , Expert Witness , CPR , Profession
printer mail-detail
215492
Experts can give evidence that is then considered factual rather than expert evidence within CPR 35. In this week’s NLJ, Dr Chris Pamplin, editor of the UK Register of Expert Witnesses, explores the fine line between evidence of fact and expert opinion.

Dr Pamplin writes: ‘In general, where either party wishes to rely on evidence that refers to or contains expert opinions, any original reports should comply with CPR 35.’

He covers a range of civil and criminal caselaw where expert evidence has crossed, or almost but not quite crossed, this line. 
Issue: 8112 / Categories: Legal News , Expert Witness , CPR , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

Quinn Emanuel—James McSweeney

London promotion underscores firm’s investment in white collar and investigations

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Ward Hadaway—Louise Miller

Private client team strengthened by partner appointment

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

NLJ Career Profile: Kate Gaskell, Flex Legal

Kate Gaskell, CEO of Flex Legal, reflects on chasing her childhood dreams underscores the importance of welcoming those from all backgrounds into the profession

NEWS
Overcrowded prisons, mental health hospitals and immigration centres are failing to meet international and domestic human rights standards, the National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) has warned
Two speedier and more streamlined qualification routes have been launched for probate and conveyancing professionals
Workplace stress was a contributing factor in almost one in eight cases before the employment tribunal last year, indicating its endemic grip on the UK workplace
In Ward v Rai, the High Court reaffirmed that imprecise points of dispute can and will be struck out. Writing in NLJ this week, Amy Dunkley of Bolt Burdon Kemp reports on the decision and its implications for practitioners
Could the Supreme Court’s ruling in R v Hayes; R v Palombo unintentionally unsettle future complex fraud trials? Maia Cohen-Lask of Corker Binning explores the question in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll