header-logo header-logo

28 October 2010 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7439 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession , CPR
printer mail-detail

Expert assessment

How much do your experts know about the Civil Procedure Rules? Mark Solon investigates

It is the nightmare of every litigator to watch their expert cross examined and the expert revealing a lack of knowledge in their professional field. The credibility of the expert is demolished with potential catastrophic consequences for the case.

Knowledge

I have discussed in previous articles the necessity for careful selection of all experts and then making sure the expert really does have the right qualifications and experience for the issues in question.
However, since October last year, experts are also required to know the Civil Procedure Rules.

The Rules state that all experts’ reports must contain a statement that experts “are aware of the requirements of Pt 35 and Practice Direction 35, this protocol [the Protocol for the Instruction of Experts to Give Evidence in Civil Claims] and the practice direction on pre-action conduct”.

The Rules also state that: “Those intending to instruct experts to give or prepare evidence for the purpose of civil proceedings should consider whether

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll