04 August 2026 Sean Mosby 3 Case Updates Downes v Ostrowicka 118DC085 by Sean Mosby Summary The Claimant brought a claim in negligence against the Defendant, a dental practitioner, about the Defendant’s alleged failure to provide her with adequate advice about the risks and benefits of the treatment options available to her. The Claimant’s expert lacked understanding of the Bolam test, had not considered the dental notes, and was forced to make significant concessions in the joint report. Learning points Learning points for instructing parties An expert witness who does not have considerable experience in their professional field may find it more difficult to establish their standing as an expert in the eyes of the court. This is especially likely to be the case if they struggle to demonstrate a complete understanding of their role as an expert witness or if the opposing expert has vastly more experience. Learning points for experts Make sure you understand the relevant tests, such as Bolam and Bilitho. Make sure you set out in your report, and fully consider, both the advantages and disadvantages of your preferred option. If the instructing solicitors ask you to submit your report via a portal of some type, ensure it does not limit your access to the relevant notes and other evidence. Check that you can still meet all of the requirements of the relevant rules and regulations, including the requirement to sign the report. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the Judgment Share Print Tags Dentistry16. Criticism and Complaints10. Records Assessments and Site Visits06. Rules and Regulations11. Report Writing14. Changing your opinion13. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements15. Giving Oral EvidenceBolam Test Switch article The Digital Footprint: An Overlooked Source of Expert Evidence — Lessons from Shaheen and Ahmed v Daish [2025] EWHC 3056 (KB) Previous Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.