ERE Pledge is now under the custodianship of the Expert Witness Institute ERE Pledge is now under the custodianship of the Expert Witness Institute

ERE Pledge is now under the custodianship of the Expert Witness Institute

The Equal Representation for Expert Witnesses (ERE) Pledge has transferred from its founding host organisation (AlixPartners) to the custodianship of...
We all can and do make errors and omissions We all can and do make errors and omissions

We all can and do make errors and omissions

Having written in Hospital Update, 48 years ago, about routine parenteral thiamine alongside prophylaxis or treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms,...
Cleveland Potash Limited v The Honourable Mrs Ferelith Drummond & Ors [2026] EWHC 1182... Cleveland Potash Limited v The Honourable Mrs Ferelith Drummond & Ors [2026] EWHC 1182...

Cleveland Potash Limited v The Honourable Mrs Ferelith Drummond & Ors [2026] EWHC 1182...

The applicant, who required leases over mineral rights, could not agree with the owners of those rights on compensation and valuation issues. The...
A Day in the Life of an Occupational Therapy Expert Witness A Day in the Life of an Occupational Therapy Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of an Occupational Therapy Expert Witness

Clare Cole is an Occupational Therapist with nearly 17 years of clinical experience, who now works as an Expert Witness in the medico-legal field....

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.

Kirk v Culina Group Ltd [2024] EWHC 1431 (KB)
Case Updates

Kirk v Culina Group Ltd [2024] EWHC 1431 (KB)

The court considered that there was some substance to the criticisms of an accident and emergency expert for not dealing with matters in his primary report which he then agreed in the joint report with the opposing expert (who had included the issues in his primary report). These were however criticisms for failing to deal with points, rather than criticisms of the opinions he actually expressed in his primary report.