News

An expert is entitled to revise his or her opinion in light of a judge's finding as to what is or is not required in order to comply with particular regulations or equivalent regulatory standards.

Mr X accepted instructions to provide advice in property valuation despite not being an expert in that field. 

Kallakis v Kallakis [2023] EWHC 2148 (Comm) 

During this year’s EWI Conference on 17 May, Beth Rigby presented a session on the Expert Witness: In Practice. The session featured practical examples of an Expert under cross-examination to illustrate the pitfalls of oral evidence and how to avoid them, before concluding with breakout groups to discuss concerns with, and tips for, cross-examination. We've collated the insigfhtful feedback from these discussions. 

One of the UK’s leading experts in Japanese knotweed, Dr Paul Beckett has been providing Expert Witness services since the early 2000s. He shares his insights into being part of a relatively new area of litigation; what makes a good Expert Witness; and why he approaches court like revising for an exam.

The Hon. Mrs. Justice Bacon delivered her closing address on how the role of the Expert Witness has evolved in modern litigation and the challenges this presents for experts, those instructing them, and judges alike.

Rod Appleyard has been practising as an Expert Witness for almost 28 years, specialising in the forensic investigation of fenestration and building envelope defects. He shares what led him to the Expert Witness field; his advice for starting out; and why volunteering in a war zone changed his outlook on work and life.   

A defendant who chose not to attend or be represented at trial, suggested that he might still instruct his expert witness to provide oral evidence. 

Ben Leeson & Anor v Donald McPherson [2024] EWHC 976 (Ch)

The case of Valdo Calocane, convicted of diminished responsibility manslaughter, has brought to the public’s attention the role of expert psychiatric witnesses in cases of alleged murder. The case raises a number of issues about the role of expert witnesses in criminal proceedings, mental condition defences and the meaning of public interest.

The judge found that an expert witness's anlaysis became incoherent because he failed from the outset to take into adequate account the NICE recommendations. 

The judge found that providing preliminary advice on the issues that arise regarding quantum did not impinge on the expert's ability to subsequently provide independent expert advice.