18 February 2025 Keith Rix 365 Case Updates Medical reporting agency at work byKeith Rix Commentary The issue in this judicial review did not turn on the expert evidence but the case illustrates the role of a medical reporting organisation (MRO) in a particular civil case and there are some general learning points. Of note, the MRO did not arrange the correction of an erroneous date, it did not recognise how the evidence set out by the expert was seemingly insufficiently referenced and it did not recognise that there would be questions as to how some of the expert’s conclusions were reached. Learning points Before submitting a report, someone should proof-read it. Facts and assumed facts upon which reliance is made should be sufficiently referenced for the reader to know their source. It should be possible to distinguish clearly between what information is provided by the subject of the report and what is obtained from other sources. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the Judgment Share Print Tags 11. Report WritingMedical Reporting OrganisationMRO Related articles Lost in translation Elevate Your Expertise: Join the EWI's Inaugural Study Day in London An approach entirely contradictory to the duties and responsibilities of expert witnesses identified in The Ikarian Reefer Krzysztof Lukasik v Circuit Court, Praga in Warsaw (A Polish Judicial Authority) [2025] EWHC 282 (Admin) A Day in the Life of an Accountancy Expert Witness Switch article Podcast Episode 9: Becoming an Expert Witness Previous Article Kohler Mira Limited v Norcros Group (Holdings) Limited [2024] EWHC 3247 (Ch) Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.