The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care v PPE Medpro Limited [2025] EWHC 2486... The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care v PPE Medpro Limited [2025] EWHC 2486...

The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care v PPE Medpro Limited [2025] EWHC 2486...

The defendant was contracted, during the Covid lockdowns, to source and supply sterile gowns, which the claimant subsequently asserted were not...
New EWI Guidance on Responding to Written Questions New EWI Guidance on Responding to Written Questions

New EWI Guidance on Responding to Written Questions

We have just published our new Guide on Responding to Written Questions. Informed by the knowledge and experience of the EWI Editorial and...
Yodel Delivery Network Limited v Jacob Corlett & Ors [2025] EWHC 1435 (Ch) Yodel Delivery Network Limited v Jacob Corlett & Ors [2025] EWHC 1435 (Ch)

Yodel Delivery Network Limited v Jacob Corlett & Ors [2025] EWHC 1435 (Ch)

The two handwriting experts in this case were given completely different samples of comparator signatures and did not undertake the same task. The...
A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness

Veterinary surgeon, Jeremy Stattersfield, has been guiding courts on veterinary medicine since 1981. He told us how he got into the Expert Witness...
Podcast Episode 21: Responding to Written Questions Podcast Episode 21: Responding to Written Questions

Podcast Episode 21: Responding to Written Questions

In January's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we discuss responding to written questions. We look at the rules and regulations, discuss a...
Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025 Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025

Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025

Join us for the last podcast of 2025! With some festive cheer, we review 2025, with the ten key issues for expert witnesses that we've seen over...
A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness

Mr Niall Craig is a Consultant Orthopaedic Spinal Surgeon and Expert Witness specialising in complex spinal cases. He tells us about his professional...
Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice

Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice

In this month's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we explore recent developments in Transparency and Open Justice. You can also catch our...
A Day in the Life of a Paramedical Skin Camouflage Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Paramedical Skin Camouflage Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Paramedical Skin Camouflage Expert Witness

Vanessa Jane Davies is the founder of Skin Camouflage Services, an independent expert practice offering paramedical skin camouflage, non-invasive scar...

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.

Expert evidence a matter for Trial judge: Application to exclude it at pre-trial stage refused as misconceived
Wiebke Morgan 3137

Expert evidence a matter for Trial judge: Application to exclude it at pre-trial stage refused as misconceived

byWiebke Morgan

In a fatal accident and personal injury damages claim the claimant made a number of criticisms of the Defendant’s expert’s report and applied to exclude it on several grounds:
 

  • lack of expertise
  • expressing opinions outside areas of expertise
  • failure to maintain impartiality

 

Mr Dexter Dias KC (sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court) found the application to be fundamentally misconceived and dismissed it.

 

He gave each ground in-depth consideration and found that it was a matter for the trial judge to determine – not at pre-trial.

 

The judgement (link below) is worth reading. For example, regarding the allegation of ‘expressing opinions outside their expertise’, the judge states:

 

I find that this particular objection is classically a matter for the trial judge's judgment and discretion. I conclude, first, that it is not a basis for the exclusion of Mr X's evidence; second, it is not appropriate at this point, as Mr Y submits as his subsidiary position, to excise or to remove a particular passage or passages. That is a matter for the trial judge to assess once the evidence is before her or him.”

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.