header-logo header-logo

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

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

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Jackson Lees Group—Jannina Barker, Laura Beattie & Catherine McCrindle

Firm promotes senior associate and team leader as wills, trusts and probate team expands

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Asserson—Michael Francos-Downs

Manchester real estate finance practice welcomes legal director

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

McCarthy Denning—Harvey Knight & Martin Sandler

Financial services and regulatory offering boosted by partner hires

NEWS
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
From cat fouling to Part 36 brinkmanship, the latest 'Civil way' round-up is a reminder that procedural skirmishes can have sharp teeth. NLJ columnist Stephen Gold ranges across recent decisions with his customary wit
back-to-top-scroll