Is baldness a disease? Is baldness a disease?

Is baldness a disease?

Mr Simon Britten, immediate past chair of the British Orthopaedic Association Medico-legal Committee, in his foreword to the forthcoming Expert...
Ivan Norman v N & CJ Horton Property (a firm) [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch) Ivan Norman v N & CJ Horton Property (a firm) [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch)

Ivan Norman v N & CJ Horton Property (a firm) [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch)

The judge determined that the proposed expert evidence, to support the existence of a money laundering scheme, was not admissible and, even if...
Navigating the excessive difference in valuations from  two Expert Quantity Surveyors Navigating the excessive difference in valuations from two Expert Quantity Surveyors

Navigating the excessive difference in valuations from two Expert Quantity Surveyors

The complexities of this case required both parties to engage expert quantity surveyors.  Both sides approached their instructions to their...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Expert evidence in judicial review proceedings
Sean Mosby 220

Expert evidence in judicial review proceedings

bySean Mosby

 

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

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.