header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
19 September 2014 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7622 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

A foreign affair

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
professionpamplin

Chris Pamplin looks at some of the expert witness issues that can arise in litigation that crosses EU member state borders

In a shrinking commercial world, lawyers may well find themselves involved in some form of cross-border litigation. Such litigation carries with it potential difficulties and, not least among these, is the form and manner in which experts are appointed and expert evidence is taken. Within the EU, however, there have been attempts to “streamline” the process, but these can throw up their own problems.

When you crash your car in France

In cases in which some obligation arises (other than through contract) that have a connection with more than one European state, such as road traffic accidents involving citizens of more than one EU member state, EU Regulations (Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 (Brussels I)) permit the injured party to bring an action directly against the insurer in the courts in the country in which the claimant is domiciled, provided that a direct action is permitted and

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
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

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
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
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’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll