Rough or inappropriate handling of an infant Rough or inappropriate handling of an infant

Rough or inappropriate handling of an infant

As in many family cases, the issue here was the cause of the child’s injuries. It includes a distinction to be made between handling in...
Unresponsive episodes in a child and the role of chloral hydrate Unresponsive episodes in a child and the role of chloral hydrate

Unresponsive episodes in a child and the role of chloral hydrate

For the specialists this case illustrates how the court investigates case of perplexing presentations in children and the importance of considering as...
Family Justice Council Guidance on Covert Recordings in Family Law proceedings concerning... Family Justice Council Guidance on Covert Recordings in Family Law proceedings concerning...

Family Justice Council Guidance on Covert Recordings in Family Law proceedings concerning...

The Family Justice Council (FJC) has published guidance for professionals and litigants who represent themselves on the use of covert recordings in...
Access to public domain documents pilot Access to public domain documents pilot

Access to public domain documents pilot

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee has approved in principle a 2-year pilot on “access to public domain documents” in the Commercial...
How to Reduce the Re-traumatisation of Claimants in Medico-Legal Litigation Claims How to Reduce the Re-traumatisation of Claimants in Medico-Legal Litigation Claims

How to Reduce the Re-traumatisation of Claimants in Medico-Legal Litigation Claims

The EWI has been provided with a copy of a recently written paper setting out the risk of re-traumatising claimants in medico-legal litigation and...
A Day in the Life of a Digital Forensics Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Digital Forensics Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Digital Forensics Expert Witness

Ryan Shields is a digital forensics expert who has worked in the police and private sector. Here, he explains why he is passionate about using his...
Podcast Episode 12: Expert Discussions and Joint Statements Podcast Episode 12: Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

Podcast Episode 12: Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

In the 12th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we discuss Expert Discussions and Joint Statements. Joint Statements are critical documents in any...
Martin Craig Nicholas & Ors v Barnes Davison Thomas & Anor [2025] EWHC 752 (Ch) Martin Craig Nicholas & Ors v Barnes Davison Thomas & Anor [2025] EWHC 752 (Ch)

Martin Craig Nicholas & Ors v Barnes Davison Thomas & Anor [2025] EWHC 752 (Ch)

The claimants, who carried on a business breeding falcons, made allegations of harassment and nuisance against their neighbour, who operated a small...
Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness

Podcast Episode 11: AI and the Expert Witness

In the 11th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we take a look at how AI is being used by Expert Witnesses. We discuss general developments related...
A Day in the Life of an Aerial Imagery Expert A Day in the Life of an Aerial Imagery Expert

A Day in the Life of an Aerial Imagery Expert

Chris Cox is a professional heritage consultant, specialist interpreter of aerial imagery and Lidar data, and an Expert Witness. She is the...
Podcast Episode 10: Equal Representation for Expert Witnesses Podcast Episode 10: Equal Representation for Expert Witnesses

Podcast Episode 10: Equal Representation for Expert Witnesses

In Episode 10 of the Expert Matters Podcast we celebrate International Women's Day. Women are appointed or testify in only 9% of disputes...
A Day in the Life of an Accountancy Expert Witness A Day in the Life of an Accountancy Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of an Accountancy Expert Witness

Heather Rogers is an accountant, tax practitioner and Expert Witness. Most of her cases involve director disputes or professional negligence where...

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's report failed to comply with practically every requirement
Simon Berney-Edwards 2963

Expert's report failed to comply with practically every requirement

bySimon Berney-Edwards

The recent judgment by Master David Cook in Pal -v- Damen [2022] EWHC 004697 (QB) demonstrates that judges will consider the compliance of reports when assessing the weight to place on expert evidence.

 

Mr Steyvers’ report failed to comply with practically every requirement. It appeared to me that he was acting as an advocate on behalf of his client’s position which is perhaps not surprising as he acts for the Surgeon in Belgium.

 

In the judgement, he concluded:

 

55. I conclude that I can place no weight upon the evidence of Mr Steyvers. The requirements of an expert’s report are set out in PD 35 §3.2: “An expert's report must:

  1. give details of the expert's qualifications;
  2. give details of any literature or other material which has been relied on in making the report;
  3. contain a statement setting out the substance of all facts and instructions which are material to the opinions expressed in the report or upon which those opinions are based;
  4. make clear which of the facts stated in the report are within the expert's own knowledge;
  5. say who carried out any examination, measurement, test or experiment which the expert has used for the report, give the qualifications of that person, and say whether or not the test or experiment has been carried out under the expert's supervision;
  6. where there is a range of opinion on the matters dealt with in the report –
    1. summarise the range of opinions; and
    2. give reasons for the expert's own opinion;
  7. contain a summary of the conclusions reached;
  8. if the expert is not able to give an opinion without qualification, state the qualification; and
  9. contain a statement that the expert –
    1. understands their duty to the court, and has complied with that duty; and
    2. is aware of the requirements of Part 35, this practice direction and the Guidance for the Instruction of Experts in Civil Claims 2014.”

 

56. Mr Steyvers’ report failed to comply with practically every requirement. It appeared to me that he was acting as an advocate on behalf of his client’s position which is perhaps not surprising as he acts for the Surgeon in Belgium. He did not give any proper consideration to the evidence of Ms Spronken and did not fully consider the available documentary evidence with the inevitable result that he did not provide a balanced opinion covering the range of possible opinions. The most obvious illustration of this tendency was his abrupt observation that Mr Beer’s report “contains a lot of mistakes and incorrect information”.

 

57. Mr Delvaux’s report was presented in a manner which complied with CPR 35 however, there are parts of his reasoning which do not withstand logical analysis, in particular his reference to the Court of Appeal of Liège case at §12 of his report. In my view and in agreement with Mr Beer the facts of this case are to be distinguished for reasons given by him in his supplemental report; on the basis of Ms Spronken’s uncontested evidence the Claimant did in fact have a choice of whether to proceed with the Surgeon and freely chose to do so. It was this issue which was the basis of Mr Delvaux’s opinion that there was an “all in” contract with the clinic.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.