13 February Case Updates Mantir Singh Sahota v Albinder Singh Sahota & Ors [2024] EWHC 2165 (Ch) 16. Criticism and Complaints, Forensic Accounting, 14. Changing your opinion, 15. Giving Oral Evidence 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.
11 February Case Updates A mother's malign influence on her children 10. Records Assessments and Site Visits, Toxicology, Haematology Paediatrics, Pharmacology, Respiratory medicine, 11. Report Writing This is a case which will assume much greater importance for the 15 points of practice and practical steps that the judge decided can help reduce the risk of well-meaning professionals falling into pitfalls that hinder the identification of safeguarding issues at an early stage than as a case with learning points for experts. For some of the experts in the fields from which jointly appointed experts were instructed, it illustrates how their evidence is tested and applied in a case of suspected fabricated or induced illness (FII). Re N (Children: Fact Finding - Perplexing Presentation/Fabricated or Induced Illness) [2024] EWFC 326
7 February News Working on a ‘no win – no fee’ basis Expert Fees, Contingency Fee Professor Keith Rix discusses whether experts can accept instructions on the basis of mirroring the solicitors’ ‘no win – no fee’ agreement in personal injury compensation claims. This item appeared in the February edition of Expert Healthcare Witness Matters, a monthly email newsletter written by Professor Rix.
4 February Case Updates Can capacity be assessed on papers without a consultation? Psychiatry, Capacity, 10. Records Assessments and Site Visits Any uncertainty as to whether a psychiatrist can provide an expert report as a paper-based assessment is answered by this case. In this case the paper-based assessment was sufficient for the court to conclude that, having regard to the Mental Capacity Act 2005, s 48, there were "reasons to believe that the Appellant lacks capacity". However, the fact that the court did not make a finding of a lack of capacity and transferred the case to a Tier 3 (High Court) Judge of the Court of Protection in order to determine the matter of capacity indicates how the court recognises how much more difficult it is to make a finding when the report relies on a paper-based assessment compared to a consultation with the subject of the report. MacPherson v Sunderland City Council (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 1579
31 January Case Updates JXX v Scott Archibald [2025] EWHC 69 (SCCO) 03. Setting Fees and Getting Paid, Expert Fees, Medical Reporting Organisations, 02. Working with Agencies or Panels, 06. Rules and Regulations In considering whether the claimant should be required to provide a breakdown of expert and medical agency fees, the judge decided to offer the claimant the option of either providing the breakdown of expert and medical reporting organisation fees, to enable an assessment of work of both the expert and the MRO, or not providing that information and having the expert fees assessed on the hypothetical basis that there was no medical reporting organisation involved.
30 January News Call for evidence: Use of evidence generated by software in criminal proceedings The Ministry of Justice has published a call for evidence on the use of evidence generated by software in criminal proceedings. The call for evidence is to help the Ministry better understand how the current presumption concerning the admissibility of computer evidence is working in practice, and whether it is fit for purpose in the modern world.
28 January Case Updates Consent – post-Montgomery Clinical negligence, Dentistry, Consent, 06. Rules and Regulations Although this is a dental/maxillofacial negligence case, it is of importance for all healthcare experts instructed in cases where consent may be an issue. It highlights points about which experts should enquire when there may be an issue as to consent to a surgical or other procedure. In this case it was found that the consent process was deficient in a number of respects. It is also a case which illustrates how expert evidence can separately assist the court on the issues of breach of duty, causation, condition and prognosis. Winterbotham v Shahrak (Rev1) [2024] EWHC 2633 (KB)
23 January Case Updates A demonstrably incapable and incompetent witness who was not fit to have been put forward as an expert witness Hot-tubbing, Chartered Building Surveyor, Northern Ireland, concurrent expert evidence, The Ikarian Reefer, 06. Rules and Regulations For surveyor experts, this case illustrates some very basic errors and it may therefore also be a useful case for expert surveyor witness training. McBride v McGuigan & Anor [2024] NIMaster 20
21 January Case Updates Rebecca Lochrie v Matthew Edwards Judgment G48YJ355 Laser Eye Surgery, LASIK, 15. Giving Oral Evidence The Claimant alleged that the Defendant acted negligently in obtaining her consent for laser eye surgery including failing to adequately investigate her ophthalmic condition prior to the surgery.
20 January Day in the life A Day in the Life of an Emergency Medicine Expert Witness Accident and Emergency, 11. Report Writing, 08. Working with Instructing Parties, 15. Giving Oral Evidence Colin Holburn is an EWI fellow, governor and founding member. A consultant in accident and emergency medicine, he has been practising as an Expert Witness for over 30 years. He tells us why he still loves Expert work and shares his advice for those interested in getting into the field.