EWI Annual Conference 2026: Opening keynote tackles the use of AI in Expert Reports EWI Annual Conference 2026: Opening keynote tackles the use of AI in Expert Reports

EWI Annual Conference 2026: Opening keynote tackles the use of AI in Expert Reports

“If an Expert, a lawyer, an accountant, an engineer, a doctor produce inaccurate or unreliable opinions or use hallucinatory references, they are...
Do not leave it until cross-examination to reveal your true opinion Do not leave it until cross-examination to reveal your true opinion

Do not leave it until cross-examination to reveal your true opinion

The Claimant suffered serious injuries in a road traffic accident after the Defendant, who was driving out of a side road, collided with the...
A Day in the Life of a General Practitioner Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a General Practitioner Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a General Practitioner Expert Witness

Dr Frances Cranfield is a GP, Assistant Coroner, and a founding member of the Expert Witness Institute. With three decades of experience spanning...
New Guide to Becoming an Expert Witness New Guide to Becoming an Expert Witness

New Guide to Becoming an Expert Witness

The EWI has just published its new guide to Becoming and Expert Witness. Written by EWI Member Paul Beckett, the guide is aimed at those who are...
Ill-health and sentencing Ill-health and sentencing

Ill-health and sentencing

After summarising the case law, the court in this case stated that there is a high threshold to be reached in order for ill health or physical...
Take care not to conflate your role as a contractor with your duties as an expert witness Take care not to conflate your role as a contractor with your duties as an expert witness

Take care not to conflate your role as a contractor with your duties as an expert witness

The parties disagreed on the extent of the repairs required to the joists, and the manner in which the repairs should be effected, following the...
Podcast Episode 26: Expert Advisor versus Expert Witness Podcast Episode 26: Expert Advisor versus Expert Witness

Podcast Episode 26: Expert Advisor versus Expert Witness

This month, on the Expert Matters Podcast, we take a look at the issues and challenges of being an expert advisor versus an expert witness, and...
Help us map those working in the UK as Expert Witnesses Help us map those working in the UK as Expert Witnesses

Help us map those working in the UK as Expert Witnesses

Have your say in this important research and be in with a chance of winning £200 in vouchers of your choice.

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.

Psychiatrist removed from the GMC Register following misconduct as an Expert Witness
Simon Berney-Edwards 5218

Psychiatrist removed from the GMC Register following misconduct as an Expert Witness

by Simon Berney-Edwards

For those who believe they can act as an Expert Witness without the necessary training or understanding of their role, a recent case demonstrates why this is clearly not the case.

 

Dr Seshni Moodliar, a Consultant Psychiatrist, was removed from the GMC register following a hearing of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal.

 

Dr Moodliar had been instructed to provide expert evidence for the defence team. It was alleged that she:

  • Did not have the appropriate training or expertise
  • Failed to spend sufficient time to conduct an adequate assessment
  • Copied sections from another expert’s report into her own
  • Acted dishonestly

 

Dr Moodliar had admitted all of the allegations but some of the admissions were qualified. For example, she said that she should not remember exactly when she had started and finished her assessment and so had simply made an estimate of the time spent. These qualifications she put down as honest mistakes.

 

However, having assessed the evidence presented to the tribunal, they concluded that all the allegations were found proved.

 

In addition, the tribunal also conducted a review hearing relating to a tribunal which sat in 2022 which had imposed a sanction of conditions on Dr Moodliar for 18 months. That tribunal had found that Dr Moodliar had copied sections of someone else’s report and submitted it as her own work. In addition, in another case she had “failed to obtain a detailed background history; perform a mental state assessment; and check the veracity of B’s account. She also failed to explore the symptoms and possibility of insanity, schizophrenia or psychosis. In addition, she failed to prepare an expert report which was factually accurate. She also acted beyond her training and expertise in that she served as an expert witness without possessing sufficient knowledge of diminished responsibility and failed to keep accurate records”.

 

That tribunal had “determined that a period of conditional registration would allow Dr Moodliar to continue to work towards completing her journey of remediation, and to be able to demonstrate, with objective evidence, that she has learnt from her past failings and implemented steps to address them”.

 

In considering the sanctions to be imposed, the tribunal considered that:

  • Dr Moodliar demonstrated a lack of insight and has, in fact, regressed in her development of insight;
  • Dr Moodliar has undertaken some relevant training/courses but has not applied the training she has undertaken to develop her understanding of her misconduct;
  • Dr Moodliar misled the Tribunal during the hearing proceedings and failed to tell the truth during the hearing;
  • There has been a previous finding of impairment against Dr Moodliar for very similar allegations;
  • Dr Moodliar’s actions culminated in her giving misleading evidence before a Crown Court and she maintained her position until confronted with incontrovertible evidence to the contrary during cross-examination;
  • In preparation for this hearing, Dr Moodliar procured two testimonials as to her professionalism and honesty by misleading those who provided the testimonials;
  • Dr Moodliar misused her professional position when working with a vulnerable patient (as a consultant psychiatrist, the Tribunal considered this was particularly serious).

 

The Tribunal determined that her conduct was so serious that Dr Moodliar has been suspended with immediate effect and her name be erased from the Medical Register following the appeal period.

 

The full decision is available at the link below.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.