21 November Case Updates Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or disbelieve? Range of Opinion, Cross-examination, 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints 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)
5 November Day in the life A Day in the Life of a Medicolegal Expert Witness Medico-legal, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, Opthamology Sue Lightman is a Professor of Ophthalmology and Consultant Ophthalmologist who has been undertaking medicolegal Expert Witness work for over 20 years. Here, she explains how she got involved in expert work, why it keeps her interested, and shares her advice for other medical professionals interested in getting into the Expert Witness world.
29 October Case Updates Pfizer Inc v Uniqure Biopharma BV [2024] EWHC 2672 (Pat) 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 07. Working with Instructing Parties, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints 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.
22 October Case Updates Steven Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB) 05. Rules and Regulations, 13. Changing your opinion, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints 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.
16 October Podcast Podcast Episode 5: Range of Opinion Range of Opinion, 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 13. Changing your opinion, 11. Responding to questions, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, Podcast Range of Opinion is the focus of the 5th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast. We catch up with Colin Holburn, Chair of the EWI Membership Committee, to find out about the sorts of issues his committee sees in the expert reports submitted to them, before hearing advice from Colin and Lady Justice Simler on how to ensure you meet the requirement to provide a range of opinion.
9 October Case Updates Chifley Holdings Ltd (BVI) v The Commissioners For HMRC [2024] UKUT 301 (LC) 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 13. Changing your opinion, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints, 09. Records Assessments and Site Visits, Surveyors, Valuation The judge found that it was without justification and entirely unecessary for an expert to question the opposing expert's professionalism and motives in selecting evidence, noting that this approach was unhelpful for the tribunal.
18 September News The Single Biggest Change White Paper 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 02. Setting Fees and Getting Paid, 06. Receiving Instructions, 07. Working with Instructing Parties, 08. Being instructed as a Single Joint Expert, 11. Responding to questions, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints, 09. Records Assessments and Site Visits Earlier this year, we asked our members about the single biggest change they’ve seen since they started practicing as an Expert Witness. With members from numerous disciplines who’ve been practicing from 40 years to 4 months, we expected a wide variety of insights, and we weren’t disappointed.
17 September Case Updates Cardiotocograph – normal or abnormal Obstetrics, Midwifery, 10. Report Writing, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints This case is primarily of interest to obstetricians, illustrating the court’s approach to the disputed interpretation of cardiotocographic evidence. There were no midwifery issues as such, but it may be of some interest to midwifery experts. The general learning points speak for themselves without reading the summary. Woods v Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2024] EWHC 1432 (KB)
12 September Case Updates Known unknowns and the non-accidental injury hypothesis Non-accidental injury, 08. Being instructed as a Single Joint Expert, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints, Known unknowns, Metaphyseal corner fractures, Protein pump inhibitors The detail of this judgment will mainly be of interest to paediatricians, radiologists and clinical pharmacologists as it is another case in which there has been an issue as to the effects of proton pump inhibitors on bone growth. There are some learning points of more general application arising out of the criticisms of the experts and particularly relevant to all single joint experts, not just jointly appointed experts in the Family Court. Re M (A Child) (Non-Accidental Injuries; Wider Canvas) [2024] EWFC 209 (B)
3 September Case Updates Kwik-Fit Properties Ltd v Resham Ltd [2024] EWCC 4 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints The judge noted that that the manner in which two Expert Witnesses in Chartered Surveying gave their evidence was more advocacy than opinion, with one expert’s report reading more like a skeleton argument.