Summary

The complexities of this case required both parties to engage expert quantity surveyors.  Both sides approached their instructions to their expert from different angles which caused difficulties at trial.  This explained why the valuations were worlds apart (or as the judge commented they had a “manifestly excessive difference”) and needed some careful scrutiny and assessment by the judge. 

Whilst the approach of examining both valuations is very case specific, there are some fundamental tests which can be taken away.  An objective test was used several times as a benchmark looking at the scope of works that a ‘reasonable owner’ or ‘purchaser’ would require.  The key legal issue of “proportionality” was also visited frequently throughout the assessment of valuations. 

Learning points

Learning points for experts:

• Keep in mind that reports and oral evidence should be factual.

• Under cross-examination stay on track with your responses and don’t go beyond your field of expertise.

• Stay clear of answering questions in a way that bolsters your client’s case.

• Be familiar with the detail of the issues in your evidence.

• There will be instances when you will be challenged on your evidence and need to make sensible concessions.  Particularly if you have made an error or where there is scope for a range of views.

• Avoid arguments with counsel and ensure to answer their questions. 

• It can go against your credibility if you don’t attempt to answer questions.

• Approach cross-examination in a sensible and helpful manner thereby you will be more persuasive and reliable.

Learning points for instructing parties:

• Ensure the expert grasps the matters in issue – fundamental for cross-examination.

• Avoid a scenario which happened in this case where the judge felt that certain aspects of the expert’s evidence was work done by the instructing party’s team.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login