header-logo header-logo

Call yourself an expert?

19 May 2011 / Penny Cooper
Issue: 7466 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

Goodbye expert witness immunity, hello higher insurance premiums, says Penny Cooper

There is no doubt about it, Jones v Kaney is a landmark decision.
By a majority of 5-2 the Supreme Court abolished expert witnesses’ immunity from being sued by their clients ([2011] UKSC 13, [2011] All ER (D) 346 (Mar)). Not since the introduction of CPR 35 have we seen such a fundamental change in the law for expert witnesses. 

Jones is about a claimant (Jones) who suffered injuries in a road traffic accident and settled his case following a joint statement signed by experts. Unfortunately Jones’s expert, Dr Kaney, had signed the joint statement even though it did not accurately reflect her views. Jones sued Kaney alleging she had been negligent in signing the statement and had thereby forced him to settle for less than he would otherwise have received. Kaney claimed immunity from suit.

After considering the legal authorities the president of the Supreme Court, Lord Phillips summarised the key issues as follows:

  • What are the purposes of the immunity? 
  • What
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

Browne Jacobson—Matthew Kemp

Browne Jacobson—Matthew Kemp

Firm grows real estate team with tenth partner hire this financial year

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Hogan Lovells—Lisa Quelch

Partner hire strengthens global infrastructure and energy financing practice

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Sherrards—Jan Kunstyr

Legal director bolsters international expertise in dispute resolution team

NEWS
Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent
Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first
In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss
Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved
The Ministry of Justice is once again in the dock as access to justice continues to deteriorate. NLJ consultant editor David Greene warns in this week's issue that neither public legal aid nor private litigation funding looks set for a revival in 2026
back-to-top-scroll