7 August Case Updates When judicial criticism is unjustified Psychology, Autism, 16. Criticism and Complaints So many of the judgments summarised in this compendium are ones in which experts are criticised and there are lessons to be learned. What this judgment makes clear is that the first instance judge was wrong to have criticised Dr Matthews ("a very experienced child psychologist"). Yes, experts sometimes get it wrong and judicial criticism is justified. But judges can also get it wrong, in this case in their criticism of an expert. PP v JP & Ors [2024] EWHC 1697 (Fam)
16 July Case Updates Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Ltd [2024] EWHC 806 (KB) Psychology, Psychiatry, Orthopaedics, Pain Expert, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints, CV A claimant who sustained a moderately severe brain injury when she fell off a pier was found by the judge to have been been fundamentally dishonest.
12 July Podcast Podcast Episode 2: The Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry and the importance of Expert Witness training Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry, Post Office Scandal, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 12. Responding to questions, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints, Gareth Jenkins, Expert Witness Training Simon and Sean discuss the importance of Expert Witness training in the context of Gareth Jenkins' evidence at the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry and some recent judgments.
12 July Case Updates Hitting all three most common compliance errors in expert reports Personal injury, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 14. Changing your opinion, 12. Responding to questions, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints, 17. Maintaining your professional edge The medico-legal expert in this personal injury claim was urged by the judge to seek further training after he made all of the three most common compliance errors which the EWI sees in expert reports. Hamed v. Ministry of Justice (County Court in Cambridge – 7th June 2024)
27 June Case Updates G (A Child: Care Order) (Complex Developmental Needs) (No.2) [2023] EWFC 218 (B) Single joint expert, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints, Family Procedure Rules, FPR, Expert anonymity, Parenting capacity, remote attendance, Independent social worker, CVP An expert must read and engage with any judgments which form part of their instructions.
25 June Case Updates MB v KB [2023] EWHC 3177 (Fam) 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 09. Being instructed as a Single Joint Expert, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints, Family Procedure Rules, FPR 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.
6 June Case Updates The Cahill v Seepersad [2023] IEHC 583 Expert evidence, Independence, Duties of the Expert, Ireland, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 16. Criticism and Complaints 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.
17 May News EWI Annual Conference 2024: Opening keynote looks at the role of Expert Witnesses in the modern and modernising justice system 11. Report Writing, 16. Criticism and Complaints, 17. Maintaining your professional edge, Artificial Intelligence, 10. Records Assessments and Site Visits Our annual conference is always a highlight in the Expert Witness Institute calendar. This year’s event, which took place on 17th May, saw The Rt. Hon. Sir Keith Lindblom deliver a captivating opening keynote.
11 April Case Updates Dusko Knezevic v The Government of the Republic of Montenegro [2024] EWHC 761 (Admin) Extradition case, Extradition, Expert Report, Expertise, Extradition Act 2003, Montenegro, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 16. Criticism and Complaints The qualifications and experience of an expert in an extradition appeal did not demonstrate that he was an expert on the issues before the court.
3 April Case Updates Rebecca Thorp & Ors v Dr Harinder Mehta [2024] EWHC 652 (KB) Medical expert, NICE Guidance, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 14. Changing your opinion, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints, 17. Maintaining your professional edge The judge found that an expert witness's anlaysis became incoherent because he failed from the outset to take into adequate account the NICE recommendations.