header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 August 2018 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7806 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

Don’t be dazzled into forgetting admissibility

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7806_solon

Even the most eminent expert must comply with the admissibility rules, says Mark Solon

  • The evidence of a ‘dream team’ of eminent experts failed to pass the admissibility test in a recent extradition case.

The judgment of District Judge Zani handed down in Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 13 April 2018 in the extradition case of Bucharest Appeal Court, Romania v Alexander Adamescu provides some interesting insight into what is allowed as expert evidence.

Part of the evidence in the case was ‘expert evidence’ from Lord Carlile. This was entitled An Expert Report in relation to UK Extradition Proceedings , by SC Strategy Ltd. This company is an international strategic consultancy founded in 2012 by Sir John Scarlett and Lord Carlile of Berriew QC. Sir John, as a former Head of MI6, should know a thing or two about international affairs and Lord Carlile is a leading expert on issues of fraud and corruption. Together, they ostensibly formed the expert dream team. Their first report considered events relating to a conspiracy

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
Trowers & Hamlins—Rahul Sagar

Trowers & Hamlins—Rahul Sagar

Banking and finance practice bolstered by partner hire

mfg Solicitors—Ian Sheppard

mfg Solicitors—Ian Sheppard

Commercial litigation team welcomes senior associate in Birmingham

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Birketts—Nathan Evans

Commercial and technology team in Cambridge strengthened by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur and more—inside the litigation frontline

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

NLJ this week: Social media bans for children spark legal dilemmas
Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
NLJ this week: Leasehold reform risks creating ‘forgotten freeholders’
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
NLJ this week: Court of Appeal clarifies when a claim truly begins
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
NLJ this week: Split FDRs could ease pressure—and boost settlements
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll