Summary

The parties sought permission to rely on expert evidence from three experts in respect of the claimant’s tazkira, an official identity document issued by the former Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. The judge found the first proposed expert’s evidence to be hearsay, and (if the proceeding continued) directed the parties to re-serve the second expert’s report with evidence for which permission had not been given excised, and to re-serve the third expert’s report with a compliant declaration.  

Learning points

Learning points for experts:

• If you are asked to prepare a report before permission for such evidence has been given by the court, you should restrict your evidence to the matters that are at issue in the dispute and avoid providing evidence on issues that could potentially be, but are not currently, in dispute.

• If the court requires part of your opinion to be excised, you must consider the impact of those excisions on your full opinion.

• If you are providing evidence in a court jurisdiction that is different to the one you usually act in, take extra care to make sure you are using the correct expert declaration. You can find the current expert declarations in the EWI knowledge Hub.

Learning points for instructing parties:

• Rule 35.4(1) of the Civil Procedure Rules applies in judicial review proceedings and parties are required to obtain permission from the court to rely on expert evidence.

• It is incumbent upon you to identify the need for expert evidence as early as possible.

• It is important to understand the difference between expert evidence and hearsay evidence as they will be treated differently by the court.

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

Already a member? Login