Evie Toombes v Dr Mitchell [2021] EWHC 3234 (QB): Key Lessons for Expert Witnesses Across... Evie Toombes v Dr Mitchell [2021] EWHC 3234 (QB): Key Lessons for Expert Witnesses Across...

Evie Toombes v Dr Mitchell [2021] EWHC 3234 (QB): Key Lessons for Expert Witnesses Across...

The decision in Evie Toombes v Dr Mitchell [2021] EWHC 3234 (QB) offers important lessons for expert witnesses across all disciplines. Although the...
A Day in the Life of a Dangerous Dog Legislation Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Dangerous Dog Legislation Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Dangerous Dog Legislation Expert Witness

Shaun Hesmondhalgh has been an Expert Witness since 2016, specialising in cases involving dog welfare, dangerous dog behaviour, and dog-related human...
X and Y (Care Proceedings: Fact Finding: Death of a Child: Expert Evidence), Re [2025]... X and Y (Care Proceedings: Fact Finding: Death of a Child: Expert Evidence), Re [2025]...

X and Y (Care Proceedings: Fact Finding: Death of a Child: Expert Evidence), Re [2025]...

This was a fact finding hearing into the death of a young child. The Judge found that the neurologist expert witness failed to discharge his duties as...
Guidance on the Remuneration of Expert Witnesses in  Crime Cases Guidance on the Remuneration of Expert Witnesses in Crime Cases

Guidance on the Remuneration of Expert Witnesses in Crime Cases

The Legal Aid Agency ('LAA') has issued Guidance on the Remuneration of Expert Witnesses in Crime Cases.

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.

Toxicological evidence in an environmental contamination case
Case Updates

Toxicological evidence in an environmental contamination case

The claimants, who claimed to have suffered personal injury caused by contaminants in a housing development, relied on the evidence of Professor T. The court found that Professor T did not provide any medically reasoned justification which would allow the court to make findings supporting his conclusions and did not explain in detail how he was able to reach his view on causation. The detail of this judgment is important for toxicology experts. It may be useful for medical experts as an example of the courts’ approach to causation.

Pelosi v Lanarkshire Housing Association Ltd [2024] ScotCS CSOH 56

Bux v General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 762
Case Updates

Bux v General Medical Council [2021] EWHC 762

Relevance:      General

 

Topics:            Conflict of interest

                        Statement of truth

                        Medical records

                        Differential diagnosis

                        Causal analysis

                        Reasoning