header-logo header-logo

A model expert

21 February 2019 / Martin Burns
Issue: 7829 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Martin Burns reflects on the ever-changing role & duties of the expert witness

  • Being a technical expert does not necessarily make someone a good expert witness.

The use of experts to inform legal proceedings is nothing new. The ancient Romans, for example, occasionally employed handwriting specialists and land surveyors as legal experts. However, the systematic use of expert witnesses, and the routine admissibility of their testimony and subject matter expertise, really began to develop properly from around 250 years ago.

The model we recognise today whereby an expert witness is permitted to testify in court and provide opinion evidence can be traced to 1772. In the case of Folkes v Chadd, a civil engineer by the name of John Smeaton was instructed to provide testimony about technical issues concerning the development of a harbour at Wells-Next-The-Sea in Norfolk. The court’s decision in 1772, to use Smeaton’s opinion evidence to inform its substantive decision, was a starting point for a continuous expansion of expert testimony in court and other proceedings.

For

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

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll