header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
04 February 2022 / Maja Glowka , Tim Giles , Jessica Resch
Issue: 7965 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

A new model for joint expert statements

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
71166
An alternative approach to joint expert statements could deliver a far more useful tool for judges, as Jessica Resch, Tim Giles & Maja Glowka explain
  • The case for a single valuation model, agreed by the experts, to allow a judge to make decisions on each assumption in the calculations and see their real-time impact on the damages assessment.

As valuation and damages experts, we have been involved in many joint expert statements. For those unfamiliar: where the claimant and defendant have each appointed a damages expert, the judge may request a joint expert statement be provided. The joint statement is written together by the experts and should provide the judge with a summary of the issues on which the experts agree, and those on which they cannot agree. In some cases, the experts are given specific instructions or questions to address in the joint statement.

The process to agree a statement can be difficult and sometimes long, but the complaint that joint statements

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
Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Carey Olsen—Patrick Ormond

Partner joinscorporate and finance practice in British Virgin Islands

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Dawson Cornwell—Naomi Angell

Firm strengthens children department with adoption and surrogacy expert

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Graham Green

Media and technology expert joins employment team as partner in Cambridge

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll