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.

The direction of a Single Joint Expert should be the default position in the Family Court
Sean Mosby 1392

The direction of a Single Joint Expert should be the default position in the Family Court

bySean Mosby

The Case

The parties had separated in 2023 after 25 years of marriage. It was common ground between the parties that prima facie this was a case for equal division of the marital assets (provisionally valued by the husband’s FRC Efficiency Statement at £183 million), subject to potential arguments about liquidity and structure.

 

The parties agreed to move forward on the basis of the judge’s provisional view that he should make a direction for a Single Joint Expert ('SJE'). The judge provided a helpful explanation of his view that the direction of an SJE is the default position in the Family Court.

 

The rules on Single Joint Experts

Family Procedure Rule ('FPR') 25.11(1) states that:

 

“Where two or more parties wish to put expert evidence before the court on a particular issue, the court may direct that the evidence on that issue is to be given by a single joint expert”.

 

Paragraph 2.1 of the PD25D (and paragraph 2.1 in PD25C with respect to children proceeding) provides:

 

Wherever possible, expert evidence should be obtained from a single joint expert instructed by both or all the parties” [emphasis added].

 

The words “Whenever possible” do not appear in the equivalent Civil Procedure Rules ('CPR') provisions at CPR 35.7 and PD 35.7. This clearly indicates that the words “Whenever possible” were included for family proceedings, in contra distinction to the practice in civil procedure.

 

The judge also noted that the ‘fifth basic rule’ of the Financial Remedies Practice in its commentary on FPR Part 25 (pages 554 to 577) states that:

 

“The fifth basic rule is that whenever possible expert evidence should be obtained from an SJE instructed by both or all of the parties.”

 

The judge’s view

The judge concluded that:

          i)  Wherever possible, an SJE should be directed rather than giving permission for two or more experts to be solely instructed. This is the default position.

         ii)  The bar for departing from the default position is set high. A high degree of justification is required to persuade the court to do so.

 

The judge noted that there are a number of reasons why the default position should be instruction of an SJE including (as a non-exhaustive list):

           i)  Instructing one expert is usually cheaper than two,

          ii)  All experts have an overriding duty to the court (FPR 25.3),

         iii)  The SJE prepares a report in accordance with one joint letter of instruction, jointly provided information and one series of questions. With two or more experts,

                there is a risk the court may be faced with reports that are not just different in conclusions, but based on different information, questions and instructions,

         iv)  The parties can instruct shadow experts,

          v)  The SJE can be asked questions after the provision of the report (FPR 25.10),

         vi)  If either or both parties are dissatisfied with the SJE report, they can make a Daniels v Walker application for permission to adduce their own expert evidence.

                Experience suggests that this will only happen occasionally,

        vii)  Instruction of an SJE will usually enable the expert to decide what documents they need and request them, removing the need for lengthy questionnaires, and

       viii)  Whenever the court is considering expert evidence, issues of cost and proportionality arise.

 

Learning points

Learning points for instructing parties are:

  • The direction of an SJE should be the default position in the Family Court,
  • A high degree of justification is likely to be required to persuade the court to give permission for two or more experts to be solely instructed,
  • Instructing parties can (and in higher value cases probably should) instruct shadow experts to assist in (for example):            

Drafting the joint letter of instruction,

Raising questions for the SJE once the report has been received, and

Supporting the cross-examination of the SJE.

 

Learning points for expert witnesses are:

  • Expert Witnesses working in family law should be particularly conscious of the need to fully understand the role and duties of an SJE.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.