Non-freezing cold injury Non-freezing cold injury

Non-freezing cold injury

This was one case brought to trial in the multi-claimant non-freezing cold injury (NFCI) litigation. The case illustrates the challenges for...
One tray short of a baker’s dozen: injury on the production line One tray short of a baker’s dozen: injury on the production line

One tray short of a baker’s dozen: injury on the production line

This case concerns an important boundary matter that sometimes arises for orthopaedic experts in relation to biomechanics and ergonomics. These are...
Expert appoints herself as social worker, psychologist, therapist and judge Expert appoints herself as social worker, psychologist, therapist and judge

Expert appoints herself as social worker, psychologist, therapist and judge

At a time when psychologists in particular are concerned about psychological evidence being given by psychologists who are unregulated, this case...
Procedure for Determining Mental Capacity in Civil Proceedings Procedure for Determining Mental Capacity in Civil Proceedings

Procedure for Determining Mental Capacity in Civil Proceedings

A Civil Justice Council working group has published a report setting out recommendations for the development of a procedure for determing mental...
Podcast Episode 6: In Conversation with Giles Eyre Podcast Episode 6: In Conversation with Giles Eyre

Podcast Episode 6: In Conversation with Giles Eyre

In the 6th Episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, Simon talks with retired Barrister and expert witness trainer, Giles Eyre, who is retiring as an EWI...
A Day in the Life of a Medicolegal Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Medicolegal Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Medicolegal Expert Witness

Sue Lightman is a Professor of Ophthalmology and Consultant Ophthalmologist who has been undertaking medicolegal Expert Witness work for over 20...
Thomas Murray Joins EWI as a Corporate Partner Thomas Murray Joins EWI as a Corporate Partner

Thomas Murray Joins EWI as a Corporate Partner

We are pleased to welcome a new Corporate Partner
Celebrating Success at the Sir Michael Davies Lecture Celebrating Success at the Sir Michael Davies Lecture

Celebrating Success at the Sir Michael Davies Lecture

Successful Certification candidates receive their certificate from Lord Hodge.
Podcast Episode 5: Range of Opinion Podcast Episode 5: Range of Opinion

Podcast Episode 5: Range of Opinion

Range of Opinion is the focus of the 5th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast. We catch up with Colin Holburn, Chair of the EWI Membership Committee,...
A Day in the Life of a Water Quality Expert A Day in the Life of a Water Quality Expert

A Day in the Life of a Water Quality Expert

Tim White is a chartered chemist who uses his expertise to assess chemical risk from exposure to water. He has been an Expert Witness for over 40...
Podcast Episode 4: Expert Fees Podcast Episode 4: Expert Fees

Podcast Episode 4: Expert Fees

Simon and Sean discuss expert fees and catch up with Dominic Woodhouse from Partners in Costs to talk about cost management and budgeting in civil...
A Day in the Life of a Fitted Kitchen and Bathroom Expert A Day in the Life of a Fitted Kitchen and Bathroom Expert

A Day in the Life of a Fitted Kitchen and Bathroom Expert

Jerry Ponder uses his 40+ years of experience in fitted interiors to provide expert evidence on the design, product quality, installation and project...

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.

Independence, bias and conflicts of interest
Emma Mitra 478

Independence, bias and conflicts of interest

byEmma Mitra

Our annual Sir Michael Davies lecture is always a highlight on the EWI calendar. This year, we welcomed The Hon Mr Justice Trower, a British High Court judge and member of The Civil Procedure Rule Committee, to deliver the speech.

Mr Justice Trower gave a fascinating look into the theme of ‘Independence, bias and conflicts of interest: when might the independence of an expert’s evidence be regarded by the court as compromised, and what are the consequences when it is?’.

Read a summary of his key insights below and purchase acccess to the lecture in full here.

Listening to the lecture can be logged as ½ CPD hours.

 

Independence and what it means for Expert Witnesses

  • Independence is an issue that every Expert will have to think about – whatever the nature or their expertise or the setting in which their evidence is given.
  • Any hint of a lack of independence can prove fertile ground for a submission that an expert’s opinion should be afforded little weight, or in an extreme case rejected altogether.
  • The concept of independence is spelt out in the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) Part 35 Practice Direction and the Guidance of the Instruction of Experts in Civil Claims.
  • The CPR and the authorities have described the concept of independence as being focused on the Expert evidence, rather than whether the Expert can properly be characterised as objectively ‘independent’ as an individual. 
  • A helpful way of thinking about independence as an Expert is the absence of dependency. The creation of an independent work product involves conduct which is autonomous and not subject to the authority, control or inappropriate influence of another person or their interest or view.
  • Discussions between lawyers and experts should not led to the preparation of Expert Reports which include material drafted by lawyers or, more subtly, drafting guided by them. There are few things more damaging to the credibility and usefulness a report if it reads like a crafted piece of written advocacy.

 

Conflicts of interest and potential bias

  • Conflicts of interest don’t always render expert evidence inadmissible, but full details of the nature of that interest must always be disclosed: if in doubt about any pre-existing relationship, make full disclosure.
  • There’s a distinction between the admissibility of evidence adduced from an Expert who has a pre-existing relationship with the party by whom they are instructed, and the weight it will be accorded by the court when deciding the case.
  • An Expert in this position can expect to be challenged on the independence of their work product during the course of cross examination to test their willingness and ability to carry out their primary duty to the court.
  • In its most extreme form, conscious bias arises where an Expert willingly offers whatever opinion is required, without regard to whether it reflects their considered views.
  • Unconscious bias is a trickier problem and flows from what a respected Australian judge (Justice Peter McClellan) has called “the influence of the inevitable human desire to win the debate”. Experts who regularly give evidence for the same client are likely to be more prone to this phenomenon than those who do not. 
  • Perhaps the best form of defence against unconscious bias is that Experts with integrity should always remember that, although the desire to win is a natural human condition, they are not a competitor in the race. They are simply there to help the umpire achieve the just result.

 

Listen to the Sir Michael Davies lecture in full and earn ½ CPD hours.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.