The Case

Due to a supervening and unforeseen change in his financial position, L was seeking to vary, discharge and/or set aside a number of financial remedy final orders which he and his former wife had previously made by consent.

 

The judge was considering an application from the ex-husband for a stay and applications from the ex-wife for a Hadkinson Order and security for costs.

 

Case Management

In considering case management, the judge noted that:

 

“The expert reports are all supported by extremely lengthy appendices containing highly technical documents (there is an account of one exhibit simply being unexplained spreadsheets of figures: ‘Comparative World Overview Tables’). One exhibit runs to over twenty-two lever arch files. The size (and indeed, from counsel’s descriptions, the content) of these appendices will be indigestible to the court in [a five day] hearing. I have made clear to the parties that the information on which the experts wish to rely will need to be condensed and translated into a form and size which is manageable and proportionate for the enquiry on which I will be engaged.”

 

The judge also directed a discussion between experts in the same disciplines to draw up a schedule of agreement and disagreement. Questions to the experts from the parties would be considered at the pre-trial review hearing.

 

Learning points

• In preparing their report, expert witnesses should bear in mind that the judge (or members of the jury) are not experts in that field and will have a limited amount of time to digest the expert evidence.
• The information set out in the report (and appendices) should be labelled and described with sufficient clarity for a non-expert reader to understand its nature and purpose.