Quarterly Update on EWI's Advocacy Work Quarterly Update on EWI's Advocacy Work

Quarterly Update on EWI's Advocacy Work

One of the key roles of the Expert Witness Institute (‘EWI’) is to ensure that policy, rule and regulatory changes are informed by the...
Access to Public Domain Documents Pilot will launch on the 1st January 2026 Access to Public Domain Documents Pilot will launch on the 1st January 2026

Access to Public Domain Documents Pilot will launch on the 1st January 2026

From 1 January 2026, the Civil Procedure Rule Committee will be piloting access to public domain documents in the Commercial Court and London Circuit...
An unsatisfactory forensic medical report An unsatisfactory forensic medical report

An unsatisfactory forensic medical report

The appellant is a citizen of Iraq. He appealed against the decision of a First-tier Tribunal Judge who dismissed his appeal against the...
Sir Michael Davies Lecture 2025: Lady Simler, Enhancing Expert Evidence: Reports,... Sir Michael Davies Lecture 2025: Lady Simler, Enhancing Expert Evidence: Reports,...

Sir Michael Davies Lecture 2025: Lady Simler, Enhancing Expert Evidence: Reports,...

The Annual Sir Michael Davies Lecture for 2025 was held on 15 October at the RAF Club in London. The Right Honourable Lady Simler, Justice of the...
Patricia Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Limited [2025] EWHC 2429 (TCC) Patricia Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Limited [2025] EWHC 2429 (TCC)

Patricia Andrews & Ors v Kronospan Limited [2025] EWHC 2429 (TCC)

The Claimants alleged that dust, noise and odour emitted by the defendant’s factory over a prolonged period constituted a legal nuisance. The...
Impact speed and risk of injury Impact speed and risk of injury

Impact speed and risk of injury

There are some general learning points for all experts but otherwise this is for neurosurgeons. It is another road traffic accident personal injury...
A Day in the Life of a Speech and Language Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Speech and Language Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Speech and Language Expert Witness

Julie Andrews is a consultant Speech and Language Therapist providing assessments for Special Educational Need (SEND) tribunals and writing...
Podcast Episode 17: Wellbeing and Resilience as an Expert Witness Podcast Episode 17: Wellbeing and Resilience as an Expert Witness

Podcast Episode 17: Wellbeing and Resilience as an Expert Witness

October 10th is World Mental Health Day and in this month's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we look at the issue of wellbeing and...
A Day in the Life of a Jewellery and Gemstone Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Jewellery and Gemstone Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Jewellery and Gemstone Expert Witness

Dr Richard Taylor is an Expert in the identification, verification and valuation of diamonds, gemstones, jewellery, watches, silver and antiques. He...
Podcast Episode 16: CV Writing Podcast Episode 16: CV Writing

Podcast Episode 16: CV Writing

In the 16th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, Simon and Sean, discuss CV Writing. We look at the purpose of expert CVs, the rules and...
Podcast Episode 15: The Power of EWI Membership: Raising Standards in Expert Witness... Podcast Episode 15: The Power of EWI Membership: Raising Standards in Expert Witness...

Podcast Episode 15: The Power of EWI Membership: Raising Standards in Expert Witness...

In the 15th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, Simon and EWI's Membership Manager, Will Watkis, discuss the power of EWI membership and the...
A day in the life of an Accommodation Expert Witness A day in the life of an Accommodation Expert Witness

A day in the life of an Accommodation Expert Witness

Marisa Shek is a Healthcare Architect and owner of Shek Architects. As an Expert Witness, she specialises in the field of accommodation for disabled...

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.

de Renee v Galbraith-Marten (Rev) [2022] EWFC 118
Wiebke Morgan 2573

de Renee v Galbraith-Marten (Rev) [2022] EWFC 118

byWiebke Morgan

The case: an application by Catherine de Renée for financial provision for the parties’ daughter. The mother bolstered her application by filing, without permission and in direct breach of the judge’s directions order, a further 25 page statement which included a forensic report by Sid Harding of SRH Forensics LLP. 

 

Ruling on admissibility: With considerable hesitation the judge agreed to read the report. However, he placed no weight on the contents of the report not only because of its filing in blatant breach of the law, but also because of the following matters.

 “at the end of an experts report there must be a statement that the expert understands and  has complied with the expert’s duty to the court”.

No such statement was appended to Mr Harding’s report.

Mr Harding appeared to have been shown documents which had been disclosed in earlier proceedings by the husband to the wife, without the court’s permission. Such disclosure would be a contempt of court by both the discloser and the recipient of the documents.

Mr Harding put forward his opinions based on the most flimsy of materials, without seeking the husband’s contribution or clarifications. This failure to seek any clarifications from the husband was considered egregious, and flew in the face of the most elementary rule governing an expert. It is basic, if you are going to put forward an expert’s report, that it must be objective. And objectivity requires, where there are lacunae, that clarification is sought from the other party before going into print.

In the absence of up-to-date and reliable evidence from the husband, Mr Harding’s conclusions were largely conjectural. His was a highly partial exercise.

 

The judge was surprised that Mr Harding, holding himself out as a partner in a firm that focuses on forensic accounting, should have been apparently entirely oblivious of the legal obligations that attach to people who hold themselves out as experts in court proceedings. The judge found it very difficult to accept that Mr Harding was unaware that the permission of the court was needed to instruct him in such proceedings.

 

The judge’s conclusion was that the process by which the report was produced was so flawed, and the material on which it was based so limited and conjectural, that it would be entirely wrong for him to place any weight on it whatsoever.

 

Learning points:

  •             In a family case, do not accept instructions as an expert unless you are satisfied that the court has given permission for you to be instructed.
  •             Ensure that your report complies with any procedural rules
  •             Ensure that you have sufficient factual information upon which to base your opinion.
  •             If you need further information or clarification in order to address an issue, ask for the information or clarification.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.