Regal BA Limited v Jun Zhang [2026] EWHC 1446 (Ch) Regal BA Limited v Jun Zhang [2026] EWHC 1446 (Ch)

Regal BA Limited v Jun Zhang [2026] EWHC 1446 (Ch)

The claimant sought damages amounting to the difference between the £16.9 million contract sale price from a failed house sale and the sum ultimately...
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...

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.

Alexander Valeryevich Timokhin v Anna Anatolyevna Timokhina [2026] EWHC 439 (KB)
Case Updates

Alexander Valeryevich Timokhin v Anna Anatolyevna Timokhina [2026] EWHC 439 (KB)

The dispute was between a former husband and wife, who were Russian nationals, about a post-nuptial agreement. The judge found that much of the expert evidence on Russian law was misdirected and misspent, and of limited use. He emphasised that both experts acted at times as surrogate advocates on behalf of their instructing parties.

 

Family Procedure Rules Consultation concerning the instruction of unregulated experts in family law children proceedings
News

Family Procedure Rules Consultation concerning the instruction of unregulated experts in family law children proceedings

In recent years a range of stakeholders have raised concerns regarding unregulated experts providing evidence in family law court cases and the standard of the evidence they provide. The Family Procedure Rule Committee is consulting on new FPR 25.5A with the aim of requiring any expert instructed in family law children proceedings to be regulated. A key purpose of the changes is to ensure that any expert instructed in family law children proceedings has the appropriate skills and qualifications on which to base their expert evidence.