25 September Case Updates Good practice points in asylum and immigration psychiatric reports Credibility, Expert Report, Judicial critism, Expert anonymity, Exaggeration, Feigning, Istanbul Protocol, Remote Assessment The report of an expert in psychiatry was undermined by his acceptance of the appellent's account which, unbeknown to him, a previous tribunal had found to lack credibility. The court also attached less weight to the expert's assessment than it did to a hospital letter because the assessment had been conducted remotely. Chahal v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2024] UKAITUR UI2024001451
1 February Case Updates An expert who oversteps their role puts their evidence at risk Clinical psychology, Duty of Expert, Duty to the court, Judicial critism, European Convention on Human Rights, Humans Rights Act 1998, Gender Recognition Act 2004, 06. Rules and Regulations, 16. Criticism and Complaints, 10. Records Assessments and Site Visits An expert who does not understand their duty to be independent, and oversteps their role, risks the court either refusing to admit their evidence or placing less weight upon it. Ryan Castellucci, R (on the application of) v Gender Recognition Panel [2024] EWHC 54 (Admin)
30 January Case Updates Jagger (& others) -v- Axa Insurance PLC Credibility, Criticism of a party's legal team, CPR Part 35, Judicial critism, Cavity Wall Insulation, Construction, 06. Rules and Regulations The Claimants' solicitors abused the Court's process by issuing claims based on the evidence of an expert when there were significant concerns as to his independence in a previous case and therefore his understanding of his duty to the Court as an expert.
22 January Case Updates Expert witnesses must not act as advocates for the party instructing them Expert evidence, Judicial critism, Dentistry, Credibility of expert, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 14. Changing your opinion, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints An expert witness must be careful not to step over the boundary between being an independent expert and an advocate for the party instructing them. Balachandra v The General Dental Council [2024] EWHC 18 (Admin) (10 January 2024)
19 January Case Updates Experts making the evidence fit their own conclusions do not meet their duty to the Court Expert evidence, Medical expert, CPR Part 35, Duty to the court, Judicial critism, Credibility of expert, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 13. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 16. Criticism and Complaints A medical expert witness was not helping the Court by trying to make the evidence about a child's injuries fit their own conclusions. LCC v V & B [2023] EWFC 268 (18 August 2023)
8 August Case Updates Sicwebu v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 550 Judicial critism, 16. Criticism and Complaints “The expert vindicated”
3 October Case Updates Bitar v Bank of Beirut SAL [2022] EWHC 2163 (QB) Judicial critism, 15. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Criticism and Complaints Relevance: General Topics: Judicial criticism