6 November Case Updates Preliminary (pre-report) experts’ meetings 05. Rules and Regulations, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, Technology and Construction Court Experts, in particular medical experts, are likely to be familiar with experts’ discussions that take place after the exchange of reports. This case referred to a circumstance more commonly, or perhaps seldom otherwise, encountered in the Technology and Construction Court.
1 November Case Updates Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v Khan & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 531 Fitness to plead, Capacity, 10. Report Writing, 11. Responding to questions This case is about whether the judge erred in finding that Ms Soophia Khan had capacity to defend proceedings for contempt of court. This is an important judgment for any psychiatrist called upon to assess fitness to plead and stand trial in a criminal case or litigation capacity in a civil case; and important also for any psychologist whose evidence may be considered in such a case. It is not just because it compares the tests for fitness to plead and stand trial and litigation capacity; it is a rare illustration of not only how a judge at first instance assesses expert evidence in such a case but also of how the court of appeal analyses the judicial reasoning when such a case is appealed.
29 October Case Updates Pfizer Inc v Uniqure Biopharma BV [2024] EWHC 2672 (Pat) 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 07. Working with Instructing Parties, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints The judge in this patent case found that the claimants’ gene therapy expert had developed, quite possibly guided by lawyers, the understanding that the primary duty of an expert witness is not to say anything that may damage the instructing party’s case if it can be avoided.
25 October Case Updates How not to use AI in expert evidence 10. Report Writing, 15. Criticism and Complaints, 16. Maintaining your professional edge, Artificial Intelligence, AI, 09. Records Assessments and Site Visits In this US case, an expert in fiduciary services used Microsoft’s Copilot to cross-check calculations he used in expert evidence. He was unable to recall the prompts he used, state the sources Copilot relied on, or explain how the tool worked and arrived at its outputs. The judge provided some useful insight into the challenges with using AI in expert evidence.
22 October Case Updates Steven Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB) 05. Rules and Regulations, 13. Changing your opinion, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints The defendant’s spinal cord injury expert in this case agreed early on in his cross-examination that he had lost all objectivity and independence in the case, while the defendant’s physiotherapy and accommodation experts were criticised by the judge for adopting more partisan approaches in their later evidence.
18 October Case Updates The Owners of the "Christos Theo" v The Owners of the "Aliki" [2024] EWHC 2106 (Admlty) 11. Responding to questions The claimants objected to the wording of a question for the expert witnesses in marine engineering because it invited the experts to express an opinion on a matter of fact which is ultimately for the court.
11 October Case Updates Litigation capacity Psychiatry, litigation capacity, 10. Report Writing, 09. Records Assessments and Site Visits, Jersey Although accepting the medical expert's conclusion on the First Defendant's capacity to appear in court, the Bailiff noted that any further application for an adjournment on health grounds would require a much more significant explanation of the First Defendant's medical history, and precise problems and prognosis, to be provided well in advance. Emirates NBD Bank PJSC v Almakhawi and Ors [2024] JRC 086
9 October Case Updates Chifley Holdings Ltd (BVI) v The Commissioners For HMRC [2024] UKUT 301 (LC) 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 13. Changing your opinion, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints, 09. Records Assessments and Site Visits, Surveyors, Valuation The judge found that it was without justification and entirely unecessary for an expert to question the opposing expert's professionalism and motives in selecting evidence, noting that this approach was unhelpful for the tribunal.