header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
15 December 2017 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7774 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

2017: less reasons to be cheerful?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7774_solon

Fee reductions, the rise in litigants in person & the tight timetables mean expert witnesses are not happy as Mark Solon explains

Expert witnesses play a major part in the legal system providing guidance and expressing independent professional opinions to help judges and juries understand technical issues such as the cause of an injury or the value of a company. The survey shows experts are not happy, particularly because of reduced fees, the rise in litigants in person and the tight timetables.

Legal aid cuts

The have been many cuts to the legal aid budget in the last few years and these have impacted experts. The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LAPSO) has removed more than £350m from the civil legal aid budget .

Over a third of experts who could work in legal aid cases would now refuse to do so. Experts are not obliged to accept legal aid cases and expert work is for most a secondary source of income. If the fees are too

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Policing the safeguards when appointing trust corporations
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
NLJ this week: What the court considers when assessing refusal of ADR
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
NLJ this week: Finding innovative ways to fund the justice gap
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Two’s company, but three’s a crowd in financial provision cases
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
Charities Appeals Supplement: March 2026
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll