Case Updates

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

Mantir Singh Sahota v Albinder Singh Sahota & Ors [2024] EWHC 2165 (Ch)
Case Updates

Mantir Singh Sahota v Albinder Singh Sahota & Ors [2024] EWHC 2165 (Ch)

The judge found that the forensic accounting expert’s approach of forming an opinion as to the value of the Company, then carrying out a detailed calculation and only if it matches his initial opinion accepting it, undermined the credibility and reliability of his opinion as to the value of the Company.

When expert evidence falls well below the standard of a competent expert witness
Case Updates

When expert evidence falls well below the standard of a competent expert witness

The judge found that the evidence of the claimants' psychological expert fell well below the standard to be expected of a competent expert witness, both as to form and as to substance.

Rashpal Samrai & Ors v Rajinder Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB)

An unsafe conviction with flawed DNA evidence
Case Updates

An unsafe conviction with flawed DNA evidence

In this Bermudan case, the appellant successfully appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to have his convictions quashed because of errors in the collection, examination and interpretation of the DNA expert evidence used in the trial.

Julian Washington (Appellant) v The King (Respondent) (Bermuda) [2024] UKPC 34

Expert appoints herself as social worker, psychologist, therapist and judge
Case Updates

Expert appoints herself as social worker, psychologist, therapist and judge

At a time when psychologists in particular are concerned about psychological evidence being given by psychologists who are unregulated, this case illustrates the risks when an ‘independent’ social worker gives psychological evidence.

The learning points are of general application. The specifics of the case are for psychologists, psychiatrists and social workers.

Coventry City Council v XX [2024] EWFC 249 (B) 

Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or disbelieve?
Case Updates

Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or disbelieve?

The judge noted that the expert readily accepted that integral to his reasoning was that he did not believe the claimant as to the symptoms he had suffered and, probably, teh claimant's account of the incident. In the judge's view, it is entirely outside the remit of an expert to decide which witnesses of fact he believes or disbelieves.

Allard v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd [2024] EWHC 2227 (KB) 

The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work
Case Updates

The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work

The court found that a highly respected and hugely experienced histopathologist expert witness, who was overburdened with work, had made errors in his examination of the forensic material and closed his mind to possible or probable accidental causes for the injuries identified. 

London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham v G [2024] EWHC 2200 (Fam) 

Pfizer Inc v Uniqure Biopharma BV [2024] EWHC 2672 (Pat)
Case Updates

Pfizer Inc v Uniqure Biopharma BV [2024] EWHC 2672 (Pat)

The judge in this patent case found that the claimants’ gene therapy expert had developed, quite possibly guided by lawyers, the understanding that the primary duty of an expert witness is not to say anything that may damage the instructing party’s case if it can be avoided.

How not to use AI in expert evidence
Case Updates

How not to use AI in expert evidence

In this US case, an expert in fiduciary services used Microsoft’s Copilot to cross-check calculations he used in expert evidence. He was unable to recall the prompts he used, state the sources Copilot relied on, or explain how the tool worked and arrived at its outputs. The judge provided some useful insight into the challenges with using AI in expert evidence. 

 

 

Steven Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB)
Case Updates

Steven Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB)

The defendant’s spinal cord injury expert in this case agreed early on in his cross-examination that he had lost all objectivity and independence in the case, while the defendant’s physiotherapy and accommodation experts were criticised by the judge for adopting more partisan approaches in their later evidence.

RSS
12345