The pilot project seeks to use a range of highly expert consultants from a range of specialties undertake assessments of children, discuss findings with one another, and write a formal report for the Family Court.

An expert report did not address all of the questions posed in the letter of instruction, reformulated other questions, and failed to comply with FPR Part 25 in a number of important ways, while the expert witness's oral evidence failed to provide an impartial expert view. 

The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry is currently holding the public hearings for its phases 5 and 6, which will include scrutiny of the expert evidence relied on by the Post Office. We are proud that two members of EWI provided excellent, independent expert evidence or expert advice on the Horizon case. Their roles in the case demonstrate how important it is for Expert Witnesses to understand and apply the core competencies of the profession. 

Welcome to Expert Matters, the official podcast of the Expert Witness Institute. Each month, we'll be taking an informed look at the key developments in the world of expert witnesses and expert evidence.

This case update gives useful guidance on preparing a 'voice of the child' report. 

The cout found that a financial expert's report was inadmissible as evidence because he was not properly independent or objective, while very little weight could be attributed to the report of an employment expert because he lacked expertise in the area in which he purported to give expert evidence. 

This is another case that illustrates how (at least) two forms of expert evidence can be distinguished: expert factual and expert opinion evidence.

Mercy Global Consult Ltd v Adegbuyi-Jackson [2023] EWHC 3203 (Ch)

In this update on the 20-page limit for expert reports for cases on the Intermediate Track, we set out the position of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee on our concerns following further discussions, the Committee's intention to review the reforms after 12 months, and the EWI's advice to members. 

The judge considered, but did not reach a conclusion on, whether a party's communications with their expert before a joint meeting of experts should be disclosed. 

The case involved the question of whether the claimants should have permission to call expert security evidence.