01 July 2025 Sean Mosby 2394 Case Updates An ounce of reasoning is worth a pound of opinion by Sean Mosby Summary The defendants denied the validity of a will on the grounds that the testatrix lacked testamentary capacity. The judge found that the conclusion of the jointly instructed expert as to testamentary capacity was inadequately reasoned and evidenced. Learning points Learning points for experts An inadequately reasoned and evidenced opinion is unlikely to be of much assistance to the court. You should raise with the instructing party or parties any concerns you have with your instructions, such as whether the opinion sought by instructions would include matters beyond the permitted scope for expert evidence or if the instructions limit your ability to provide an opinion that will be helpful to the court. Learning points for experts Take care to select an expert who has the qualifications, experience and expertise anticipated in the order giving permission for the expert evidence. Ensure that your instructions are within the scope of the permitted expert evidence. Make sure that you have furnished the expert with all the documents they need to form their opinion. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the Judgment Share Print Tags Testamentary capacity Related articles McQuaid v McQuaid (Re Estate of Terence Benedict McQuaid) [2022] NICh 18 Lonsdale v Teasdale [2021] EWHC 2342 (Ch) Gardiner v Tabet [2021] EWHC 563 (Ch), 2021 WL 00965862 John Clitheroe v Susan Bond [2020] EWHC 1185 (Ch), 2020 WL 02736711 Switch article Review of Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims Previous Article Biased instructions, harassment and acting pro bono Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.