header-logo header-logo

Closing down

30 March 2007 / Mark James
Issue: 7266 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

The controversial practice of expert shopping could soon be history. Mark James explains

Expert shopping has long been recognised as a vice of the adversarial sys­tem. Unlike many continental systems­—where court appointed experts are the norm—in England and Wales a party is free to select its own experts and discard those that do not support its case.

There is an obvious benefit to justice in forcing an expert shopper to disclose discarded reports. It enables the court to see the full picture and makes it more likely that justice is done. Discouraging expert shopping reduces the cost of litigation. Partisan experts writing biased reports to replace discarded reports are more easily detected, and objectivity in report writing is encouraged. Once disclosed, the discarded report may be relied upon by the other side as evidence at trial (see CPR 35.11).

Privilege

The desire to eliminate expert shopping and to do justice may, and usually will, bring the court into conflict with the doctrine of legal professional privilege. There is no doubt that, prior to disclosure to

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

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

FOIL—Bridget Tatham

Forum of Insurance Lawyers elects president for 2026

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Gibson Dunn—Robbie Sinclair

Partner joinslabour and employment practice in London

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

NEWS
Cryptocurrency is reshaping financial remedy cases, warns Robert Webster of Maguire Family Law in NLJ this week. Digital assets—concealable, volatile and hard to trace—are fuelling suspicions of hidden wealth, yet Form E still lacks a section for crypto-disclosure
NLJ columnist Stephen Gold surveys a flurry of procedural reforms in his latest 'Civil way' column
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
back-to-top-scroll