header-logo header-logo

27 February 2015 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7642 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Compare & contrast (Pt 2)

nlj_7642_pamplin

Dr Chris Pamplin continues his exploration of the new guidance for experts

As we covered in the first part of this short series, Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims, the update to the 2007 Protocol for the Instruction of Experts to give Evidence in Civil Claimsleaves much of the original guidance in place but adds some new material in areas that have changed, or been introduced, since 2007 (see “Compare & contrast (Pt 1)”, NLJ, 23 January 2015, pp 19-20). This second article continues to work through the new guidance.

  • References in the form (para 1) represent the paragraph number in the new guidance.
  • New material is in bold.

Single joint experts

The standing assumption on using single joint experts (SJEs) in small claims and fast-track cases remains (para 34), with the aim being to agree or narrow issues that are not contentious (para 35). The redeployment of a party-appointed expert as an SJE requires full disclosure of the expert’s prior involvement in the

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll