X and Y (Care Proceedings: Publication of Judgment: Criticism of Expert Witness), Re X and Y (Care Proceedings: Publication of Judgment: Criticism of Expert Witness), Re

X and Y (Care Proceedings: Publication of Judgment: Criticism of Expert Witness), Re

In her judgment on X and Y (Care Proceedings: Fact Finding: Death of a Child), the Judge was highly critical of the evidence and conduct during...
Expert Witnesses at a Turning Point Expert Witnesses at a Turning Point

Expert Witnesses at a Turning Point

This year’s Annual Conference discussed AI, independence, credibility, transparency and the changing expectations on expert witnesses.
Podcast Episode 28: Reflections on the EWI Conference 2026 Podcast Episode 28: Reflections on the EWI Conference 2026

Podcast Episode 28: Reflections on the EWI Conference 2026

This month on the Expert Matters Podcast, we take a look at the EWI Annual Conference which was held on 19 June. The Conference got off to a great...

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.

Advising as to the applicable law
Case Updates

Advising as to the applicable law

The detail of this judgment is for experts who conduct capacity assessments. Two points arise of more general interest.

First, the expert, who had been involved in the case for six years, changed her opinion. In the language of the court it was a 180o degree change. The court thought that this called for a greater discussion in the analysis section of the report. This seems to have been that section of the report for which experts use the heading ‘Facts and assumed facts’ or ‘Factual analysis’. Second, the expert suggested that the issues, or some of the issues, in the case could be resolved by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the court. But there had been no application for the exercise of the court's inherent jurisdiction, it was not referred to in the letter of instruction, and it might not – as a matter of law – have been available. This is a good example of the advice to experts to leave the law to the lawyers.  

Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council v LS [2025] EWCOP 10 (T3)