Review of 2025 Review of 2025

Review of 2025

EWI Chief Executive Officer, Simon Berney-Edwards, shares his thoughts on 2025, a year where Expert Witnesses have continued to come under increasing...
A deficient capacity assessment A deficient capacity assessment

A deficient capacity assessment

The task for the expert in this case was enormous. Capacity is issue specific. This means that if the issue is someone’s capacity to conduct...
The Isolation of Experts The Isolation of Experts

The Isolation of Experts

In this article, Dr Kay Linnell OBE talks about the role of the expert witness, and the problems that can be encountered when Instructing Parties go...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

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

MB v KB [2023] EWHC 3177 (Fam)
Case Updates

MB v KB [2023] EWHC 3177 (Fam)

An expert report did not address all of the questions posed in the letter of instruction, reformulated other questions, and failed to comply with FPR Part 25 in a number of important ways, while the expert witness's oral evidence failed to provide an impartial expert view. 

Expert Evidence and The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry
News

Expert Evidence and The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry

The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry is currently holding the public hearings for its phases 5 and 6, which will include scrutiny of the expert evidence relied on by the Post Office. We are proud that two members of EWI provided excellent, independent expert evidence or expert advice on the Horizon case. Their roles in the case demonstrate how important it is for Expert Witnesses to understand and apply the core competencies of the profession. 

The Cahill v Seepersad [2023] IEHC 583
Case Updates

The Cahill v Seepersad [2023] IEHC 583

The cout found that a financial expert's report was inadmissible as evidence because he was not properly independent or objective, while very little weight could be attributed to the report of an employment expert because he lacked expertise in the area in which he purported to give expert evidence. 

First2021222325272829Last