header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
28 October 2010 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7439 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession , CPR
printer mail-detail

Expert assessment

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Switalskis—Naila Arif, Harriet Findlay & Ellie Thompson

Firm awards training contracts to paralegals through internal programme

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Ward Hadaway—Matthew Morton

Private client disputes specialist joins commercial litigation team

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Nina Hood

Cumbria firm appoints new head of residential property

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
NLJ this week: Family law urged to ditch adversarial instincts
Family law must shift from conflict-driven litigation to child-centred problem-solving, according to a major new report. Writing in NLJ this week, Caroline Bowden of Anthony Gold outlines findings showing overwhelming support for reform, with 92% agreeing lawyers owe duties to children as well as clients
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll