News

In this update on the 20-page limit for expert reports for cases on the Intermediate Track, we set out the position of the Civil Procedure Rule Committee on our concerns following further discussions, the Committee's intention to review the reforms after 12 months, and the EWI's advice to members. 

We’re starting a new EWI series with A spotlight on… the Post Office Horizon Scandal which looks at how the Post Office failed to listen to, and act on, expert advice. EWI member and IT and digital forensics expert, Jason Coyne, first spotted errors in the Horizon system in 2003 while working as a Single Joint Expert, only to have his findings dismissed by the Post Office. Jason tells us more about his involvement in the case, including how he later acted as an Expert Witness in the sub-postmasters’ case against the Post Office.

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee is consulting on proposed changes to the Civil Procedure Rules to ensure that courts consider alterative dispute resolution as a key part of the court process, and are able to both encourage and order parties ot participate in it. 

In a Parliamentary debate, Lord Bellamy, a Minister of Justice, noted the neeed for the Family Procedure Rule Comitttee to develop a solution to prevent unregulatd psychologists giving evidence in the Family Court. 

From February to April 2024, the Civil Procedure Rule Committee (‘Committee’) held a consultation on a proposed draft amendment to the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’) rule 5.4C (supply of documents to a non-party from court records). We've set out the key themes and recommendations in the EWI response. 

The judge found that providing preliminary advice on the issues that arise regarding quantum did not impinge on the expert's ability to subsequently provide independent expert advice. 

The Forensic Science Regulator is consulting on the draft for the development of version 2 of the forensic science code of practice.

In BR v BR [2024] EWFC 11, Mr Justice Peel concludes that the direction of a Single Joint Expert is the default position in the Family Court and there is a high bar to persuade the court to give permission for two or more experts to be solely instructed. 

The judge made it clear to the parties that the expert evidence must be condensed and translated into a form which is manageable and proportionate to the court's enquiry. 

L v O [2024] EWFC 6

A late application to rely on a new expert witness does not engage CPR rule 3.9 and require an application for relief from sanctions.