Is baldness a disease? Is baldness a disease?

Is baldness a disease?

Mr Simon Britten, immediate past chair of the British Orthopaedic Association Medico-legal Committee, in his foreword to the forthcoming Expert...
Ivan Norman v N & CJ Horton Property (a firm) [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch) Ivan Norman v N & CJ Horton Property (a firm) [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch)

Ivan Norman v N & CJ Horton Property (a firm) [2024] EWHC 2994 (Ch)

The judge determined that the proposed expert evidence, to support the existence of a money laundering scheme, was not admissible and, even if...
Navigating the excessive difference in valuations from  two Expert Quantity Surveyors Navigating the excessive difference in valuations from two Expert Quantity Surveyors

Navigating the excessive difference in valuations from two Expert Quantity Surveyors

The complexities of this case required both parties to engage expert quantity surveyors.  Both sides approached their instructions to their...
Postponement of the Extended Fixed Recoverable Costs Stocktake and Uprating of Fixed Cost... Postponement of the Extended Fixed Recoverable Costs Stocktake and Uprating of Fixed Cost...

Postponement of the Extended Fixed Recoverable Costs Stocktake and Uprating of Fixed Cost...

The Civil Procedure Rule Committee (‘Committee) decided, provisionally, to postpone the extended Fixed Recoverable Cost (‘FRC’)...
Family Procedure Rules Consultation concerning the instruction of unregulated experts in... Family Procedure Rules Consultation concerning the instruction of unregulated experts in...

Family Procedure Rules Consultation concerning the instruction of unregulated experts in...

In recent years a range of stakeholders have raised concerns regarding unregulated experts providing evidence in family law court cases and the...
EWI guidance for experts approached by unscrupulous expert witness agencies EWI guidance for experts approached by unscrupulous expert witness agencies

EWI guidance for experts approached by unscrupulous expert witness agencies

While there are many respectable and legitimate expert witness agencies who provide brilliant support to the expert witnesses who work with them,...
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...
Podcast Episode 9: Becoming an Expert Witness Podcast Episode 9: Becoming an Expert Witness

Podcast Episode 9: Becoming an Expert Witness

In the 9th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we look at how to become an Expert Witnesss. If you think expert witness work might be for you,...
A Day in the Life of an Emergency Medicine Expert Witness A Day in the Life of an Emergency Medicine Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of an Emergency Medicine Expert Witness

Colin Holburn is an EWI fellow, governor and founding member. A consultant in accident and emergency medicine, he has been practising as an Expert...
Podcast Episode 8: Re-evaluating your opinion Podcast Episode 8: Re-evaluating your opinion

Podcast Episode 8: Re-evaluating your opinion

In the 8th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we discuss re-evaluating your opinion. We look at possible reasons why you might wish to re-evaluate...

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.

Judgment provides illustration on what makes a good or bad Expert Witness
Simon Berney-Edwards 2995

Judgment provides illustration on what makes a good or bad Expert Witness

bySimon Berney-Edwards

The judgment in the case of CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust is essential reading for all Expert Witnesses. Whilst it is another example of a quantum care report, the lessons to be learned are relevant whatever your profession.

 

The case concerns the level award to be made to a child who has severe cerebral palsy as a result of the care received.

 

In his judgment, Mr Justice Ritchie provides a balanced analysis of the expert evidence and the Expert Witnesses who appeared before him. And as a result, this judgment provides a really helpful list of things to avoid and the kind of approaches all Expert Witnesses should take with their work.

 

So, let’s start with the problems.

 

There are a number of criticisms lodged against a number of the Expert Witnesses which were generally instructed by the defence. These can be summarised as follows:

 

  • Lacked impartiality (extracting one medical record and placing unproportionate weight on it) and in one case the opinion was considered to be uninformed and unbalanced.
  • Not acting within their CPR Part 35 responsibilities.
  • Report was not compliant (Did not put a proper part 35 statement on his reports).
  • Failed to set out the range of opinion in the report and suggested the “cheapest option” instead of the reasonable range.
  • No desire to understand the difference between the burden of proof in Court on the balance of probabilities and the medical requirement in the publication of research for the conclusions therein to be to a scientific standard.
  • Giving an opinion outside of their area of expertise
  • Did not have sufficient qualifications or experience, or in one case recent experience the expert had not worked with cerebral palsy children for 18 years.
  • Research was insubstantial, superficial, lacked-detail and, in one case, was purely desk-based.
  • Unable to demonstrate that they had thought things through in sufficient detail to match the Claimant’s needs with the correct equipment.
  • Pre-judging or fabricating evidence based on a hunch outside the field of expertise.
  • Misrepresented the existence of the Defendant’s expert therapy evidence which did not exist when they asserted it did.
  • Not updating evidence / undertaking re-examination/assessment.

 

Many of these issues are deficiencies we see being highlighted in judgments on Expert Evidence with alarming frequency. This is why it is important that all Expert Witnesses understand their duties and of the rules and regulations. However, it also highlights the need for ongoing training and reminders. Expert Witnesses need to become reflective in their practice; asking themselves every time whether they have provided an objective, unbiased opinion and considering whether they really have sufficient qualifications and skills to deal with the issues in the instruction.

 

This reminded me of the guidance we provide in our Expert Essentials course. That it is recognised that someone acting as an Expert Witness will be:

  • Suitably qualified – possessing suitable professional qualifications
  • Suitably experienced – possessing suitable professional experience

 

But that it is also important to note that there are no thresholds on the level of qualifications and experience or indeed whether qualifications outweigh expertience or vice versa.

 

The scale and extent of qualification/experience is proportionate to the scale and seriousness of the dispute.

 

In this case, some of the defendant’s Expert Witnesses may have had sufficient knowledge and experience for a lower-level case. But due to the level and complexity, their knowledge, skills and experience did not compare with their counterparts in this case.

 

So, let’s look at the positives. One of the things I like about this judgment is that whilst Mr Justice Ritchie sets out the deficiencies in the Expert Evidence, he also takes time to mention the excellent practice from the Expert Witnesses in the case (which included EWI Member, Steven Docker).

 

The judgment highlights those who:

 

  • Were helpful, balanced and persuasive.
  • Were consistent in their approach and thoughtful under cross-examination.
  • Had substantial, up to date experience, and excellent qualifications.
  • Provided clear and succinct reports and figures that were based on real experience in the field.
  • Elucidated and clarified the relevant key points.
  • Gave evidence in a measured, calm, and balanced manner, conceding points where necessary.
  • Were able to explain reasoning under cross examination.
  • Researched the issues in depth and did personal visits to make assessments.

 

These are all important lessons for any Expert Witness.

 

 

Could you do with refreshing your skills? Why not attend one of our courses in the Autumn?

 

Report Writing I

8th November, 10am - 4.30pm

The framework of Court rules and procedure that form the context for expert reports will be explained, as will the basic evidential writing skills necessary to produce reports that fulfil all the requirements of the litigation process.

 

Report Writing II

15th November, 9.30am - 4.30pm

You will learn techniques and strategies that will enable you to deliver more impactful evidence across increasingly complex issues.

 

Quantum Reports for Medical Experts

1st November, 6-7pm

Join us for our new webinar looking at Quantum Reports. We are just finalising details, and this will be available for booking shortly. If you would like to register your interest, email the team at events@ewi.org.uk

 

Confidence in the Courtroom

3rd and 4th October, 5.30-7.30pm

This two-part webinar looks at ways to ensure maximum pre-trial preparation and provides advice and techniques on how to excel during cross examination. It will also highlight the importance of CPR compliance when asked to provide oral evidence.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.