The aim of the new procedure is to ensure cases are properly pleaded before a trial date is assigned and to facilitate the earlier resolution of clinical negligence actions. This should in turn decrease legal costs.

This is primarily a case for cardiologists, cardiac nurses and anaesthetists with a learning point for psychiatric experts. Viewed from outside the jurisdiction the striking feature of the case is that the plaintiff’s general practitioner records documenting a previous psychiatric history, which she had denied when assessed by the two psychiatric experts, were not disclosed to the defendant until five days into the trial.

Tynan v Bon Secours Health System Company Ltd by Guarantee [2025] IEHC 81 

A common issue in personal injury orthopaedic cases is whether the damage of which the claimant complains is degenerative or traumatic in origin or a combination. This case illustrates for specialists in neurosurgery, orthopaedics, pain medicine and radiology how the court resolved conflicting expert evidence. It also illustrates the risks of reliance on the claimant’s self-reported history, especially if they have taken it upon themselves to research into areas of medical and legal expertise.

Rezmuves v Birney [2024] IEHC 592 

The court could see no basis on which the plaintiffs could seek to rely on any agreement reached between the experts as to the underlying facts.

Nolan v Dildar Ltd (Approved) [2024] IEHC 4 

This Irish case is primarily of interest to psychologists and others concerned about courts’ reliance on evidence from psychologists who are not registered with an appropriate regulator and not clinically trained. The points of general application concern the high threshold to be reached in order to admit as expert evidence the evidence that comes from a body of knowledge that is not widely recognised. 

This case update gives useful guidance on preparing a 'voice of the child' report. 

The cout found that a financial expert's report was inadmissible as evidence because he was not properly independent or objective, while very little weight could be attributed to the report of an employment expert because he lacked expertise in the area in which he purported to give expert evidence. 

The Court of Appeal of Ireland found that material hyperlinked in an expert report constitutes part of the reference matrial on wich the report is based and the court is entitled (if not expected) to review it if it has any concerns with the content of the report itself. 

Tesco Ireland Limited v. Stateline Transport Limited [2024] IECA 46

The High Court of Ireland found that the Irish International Protection Appeals Tribunal's duty to cooperate required it offer the applicant the chance to obtain (or have obtained by the Tribunal) a medico-legal report on injuries which had come to light during the hearing. 

“Unnecessary detail”