Irish High Court introduces two new practice directions designed to streamline clinical... Irish High Court introduces two new practice directions designed to streamline clinical...

Irish High Court introduces two new practice directions designed to streamline clinical...

The aim of the new procedure is to ensure cases are properly pleaded before a trial date is assigned and to facilitate the earlier resolution of...
Does the face fit? Does the face fit?

Does the face fit?

Experts are advised, if possible, to avoid expressing opinions on the basis of possibility. The usually applicable stand of proof is the civil...
Not a bridge too far – dental negligence Not a bridge too far – dental negligence

Not a bridge too far – dental negligence

The detail of this case is of relevance to dental experts and attention is drawn to the clarity and particularity with which Professor Harding set out...
Pacemaker PTSD? Pacemaker PTSD?

Pacemaker PTSD?

This is primarily a case for cardiologists, cardiac nurses and anaesthetists with a learning point for psychiatric experts. Viewed from outside the...
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...
EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

EWI publishes new Guidance on Expert Discussions and Joint Statements

We have just refreshed our guidance on ‘Expert Discussions and Joint Statements' in the EWI Knowledge Hub...
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’)...
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...

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.

Non-freezing cold injury
Keith Rix 568

Non-freezing cold injury

byKeith Rix

 

Commentary

This was one case brought to trial in the multi-claimant non-freezing cold injury (NFCI) litigation. The parties had been assisted by generic experts who were then called as experts in this case. Each was cross-examined on the basis that they displayed a lack of impartiality. But the court was satisfied that each of them understood their duty under Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules and sought to comply with it. Given that each had provided generic evidence for one side or the other, the court did not find it surprising that they had continued to be instructed. In itself, that did not prevent them giving objective evidence.

The case illustrates the challenges for experts when the clinical condition in issue is rarely encountered (or at least rarely recognised) in normal NHS practice. It most commonly arises in military personnel. Furthermore, there has been limited high quality, peer-reviewed research in the area of NFCI. Understanding of the condition continues to evolve. The pool of those with expertise in the condition is relatively small. The precise mechanism of injury is not currently known to medical science. Neither of the lead experts had military experience. One was challenged over his lack of clinical experience of NFCI and the other had seen only a few patients with NFCI outside medicolegal reporting. Nevertheless, both were able to assist the court. Significantly, it was apparent that both had kept themselves informed about developments in the field

In many cases where there is conflicting expert evidence, the court has to rely on an impressionistic view that one expert is generally to be preferred to the other and where one expert has been criticised this may be taken into account. However, in this case, notwithstanding the criticisms she made of one of the experts, the court was able to set aside those criticisms and base her judgment on a careful analysis of how the expert opinions fitted with the other evidence in the case.

The detail of this judgment may be of interest only to neurologists and vascular surgeons but makes useful reading for any expert instructed in a case where non-freezing cold injury is in issue. 

What the judgment does not reveal is that the claimant failed to beat the defendant’s Part 36 offer and that there had also been a failed joint settlement meeting in the case.

Learning points:

General

  • Although findings of fact are for the court and not for the experts, the court expects experts to take on board what they hear in evidence and to think about whether that alters their opinion in any material way. The main point of an expert medical witness being present while a claimant gives evidence is so that they have heard that evidence first hand and can weigh it in giving their opinion evidence.

  • Look carefully not only at the claimant's evidence but also at the histories underpinning the other experts’ opinions and cross-reference contemporaneous records. Reflect sufficiently on any inconsistencies between the history you have obtained and other sources of evidence including the evidence heard at trial.

  • Even expert witnesses may find the experience of being cross-examined challenging and different people react in different ways to that.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.