Case Updates

The sheriff appeal court upheld the sheriff's award of damages for injuries sustained in a vehicle accident which were assessed, in the absence of admissible expert evidence, on the basis of common experience. 

The case of Valdo Calocane, convicted of diminished responsibility manslaughter, has brought to the public’s attention the role of expert psychiatric witnesses in cases of alleged murder. The case raises a number of issues about the role of expert witnesses in criminal proceedings, mental condition defences and the meaning of public interest.

The qualifications and experience of an expert in an extradition appeal did not demonstrate that he was an expert on the issues before the court. 

In considering whether to appoint a scientific advisor or order the exchange of expert evidence, the judge in a patent case considered the dividing line between the two roles. 

The judge found that an expert witness's anlaysis became incoherent because he failed from the outset to take into adequate account the NICE recommendations. 

The Court of Appeal determined that an employee of the appellant was able to provide opinion evidence because he was "qualified to give expert evidence" for the purposes of section 3 of the Civil Evidence Act 1972. However, the trial judge needs to determine what weight (if any) to give to the opinions of someone who is not an independent expert instructed in accordance with the strictures and safeguards of CPR 35.

The Court of Appeal of Ireland found that material hyperlinked in an expert report constitutes part of the reference matrial on wich the report is based and the court is entitled (if not expected) to review it if it has any concerns with the content of the report itself. 

Tesco Ireland Limited v. Stateline Transport Limited [2024] IECA 46

The judge found that providing preliminary advice on the issues that arise regarding quantum did not impinge on the expert's ability to subsequently provide independent expert advice. 

The High Court of Ireland found that the Irish International Protection Appeals Tribunal's duty to cooperate required it offer the applicant the chance to obtain (or have obtained by the Tribunal) a medico-legal report on injuries which had come to light during the hearing. 

In BR v BR [2024] EWFC 11, Mr Justice Peel concludes that the direction of a Single Joint Expert is the default position in the Family Court and there is a high bar to persuade the court to give permission for two or more experts to be solely instructed.