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.

Legal teams need to observe  Expert’s fatigue & concentration
Case Updates

Legal teams need to observe Expert’s fatigue & concentration

This was a significant and well reported patent case which was determined in the Intellectual Property List within the High Court last autumn.   

The technical aspects of the case required significant expert input from the panel involved.  The cross-examinations performed by leading Counsel for the parties were lengthy and complicated.  This led to confusion over what evidence was given when the transcripts were re-visited on subsequent trial days. The case shows how consideration should be given to experts who are being cross-examined so not to overload them with questions and information on the stand.