header-logo header-logo

Expert witnesses under pressure

20 November 2014
Issue: 7631 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Nearly one third of expert witnesses say they have been put under pressure to alter a report in a way that damages their impartiality, research has shown.

Experiences included being asked to remove “damaging” sections of their report or being asked to re-write it in the client’s favour. Some experts said that solicitors had refused to pay them for their “unhelpful” report.

The shocking results were captured in a survey of 186 expert witnesses at the Bond Solon Annual expert Witness Conference in London in November. Experts are bound by civil, commercial and family procedural rules and have a duty to justice above their duty to any paying client.

However, one expert recalls: “Solicitors were asking for quoted GP notes entries to be changed. I always refused.” Another expert told how a solicitor told them “you have a duty to the court to do as instructed by the solicitor”, while another was threatened with liability for wasted costs if they refused to make changes.

An overwhelming 45% of experts said they had encountered what they believed to be “hired guns” in the past year, backing up a recent BBC Panorama investigation that found experts in handwriting, CCTV analysis and animal behaviour prepared to help clients hide the truth.

About one third of experts supported mandatory accreditation in their area, as the government is proposing in the area of whiplash claims, and 44% would like to see better regulation of experts. Tim Dutton QC, a guest speaker at the conference, told delegates it would be “difficult” to set up a separate regulatory entity for experts. Bond Solon director, Mark Solon also told NLJ last week that attempting to regulate one-off experts would be problematic.

Hourly rates ranged from £32 to £500 per hour, with an average of £177.

Issue: 7631 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll