Summary

The Claimant alleged that an accident five years earlier was the cause of the amputation of his lower leg. The judge criticised the Claimant’s orthopaedic expert, Professor H, for demonstrating at times a rather ‘loose approach’ to his expert evidence and a closed mindedness towards his evidence.

Learning points

• It may affect the weight of your evidence if the court considers that you are not open to revisiting, and potentially changing, your opinion in the light of other or new evidence. The court may reach this view even if it considers that your opinion is genuinely held and not partisan.

• If you need to re-evaluate your opinion, do so as soon as possible, notifying the other expert and the parties immediately and explaining why your opinion has changed. Make sure to provide real, cogent reasons for your change of opinion supported by literature or studies.

• It is important to analyse surveillance evidence thoroughly and comment on any details that will be of use to the court.

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

Already a member? Login