12 February 2024 Sean Mosby 1227 Case Updates Expert reports and their appendices should not be indigestible to the court bySean Mosby The Case Due to a supervening and unforeseen change in his financial position, L was seeking to vary, discharge and/or set aside a number of financial remedy final orders which he and his former wife had previously made by consent. The judge was considering an application from the ex-husband for a stay and applications from the ex-wife for a Hadkinson Order and security for costs. Case Management In considering case management, the judge noted that: “The expert reports are all supported by extremely lengthy appendices containing highly technical documents (there is an account of one exhibit simply being unexplained spreadsheets of figures: ‘Comparative World Overview Tables’). One exhibit runs to over twenty-two lever arch files. The size (and indeed, from counsel’s descriptions, the content) of these appendices will be indigestible to the court in [a five day] hearing. I have made clear to the parties that the information on which the experts wish to rely will need to be condensed and translated into a form and size which is manageable and proportionate for the enquiry on which I will be engaged.” The judge also directed a discussion between experts in the same disciplines to draw up a schedule of agreement and disagreement. Questions to the experts from the parties would be considered at the pre-trial review hearing. Learning points In preparing their report, expert witnesses should bear in mind that the judge (or members of the jury) are not experts in that field and will have a limited amount of time to digest the expert evidence. The information set out in the report (and appendices) should be labelled and described with sufficient clarity for a non-expert reader to understand its nature and purpose. More links Link to the Judgment Share Print Tags Expert reports10. Report Writing12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements15. Criticism and Complaints Related articles Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or disbelieve? When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert. The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work Preliminary (pre-report) experts’ meetings Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v Khan & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 531 Switch article Yesss (A) Electrical Ltd v Martin Warren [2024] EWCA Civ 14 Previous Article The direction of a Single Joint Expert should be the default position in the Family Court Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.