16 January 2025 Sean Mosby 3277 Case Updates NMC Health PLC v Ernst & Young LLP [2024] EWHC 3021 (Comm) bySean Mosby Summary The defendant was unsuccessful in its application for an adjournment because it was unable to demonstrate that it would be unfair to proceed with the existing trial. Learning points Learning points for experts You should provide as much evidence as possible to support your estimation of the length of time required to complete your report, especially when new evidence has appeared close to the trial date. Be aware that the court will probably take into account the time you have had to consider your opposing expert’s report and new evidence, in any request for adjournment. You should not assume that the court will give you the time you have indicated would be necessary to complete your report. Learning points for instructing parties An adjournment may be more difficult to obtain if the issues which have arisen typically arise in this type of case. It may be more challenging to obtain an adjournment where the other party’s case is funded by third party litigation funding as this may put into question the availability, or at least the terms, of the funding for their case. 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 CPRAdjournment06. Rules and Regulations Related articles Disclosure and redaction of medical and safeguarding records Some guidance for experts in professional disciplinary proceedings Experts who rise above the fray and fully discharge their duties to assist the Court Unregulated Experts in Family Court Children Proceedings DA (Whether to replace a Single Joint Expert), Re [2026] EWCOP 7 (T2) Switch article Government Response on Revisions to the Medical Reporting Process for Road Traffic Accident Claims Previous Article A Day in the Life of an Emergency Medicine Expert Witness Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.