header-logo header-logo

19 September 2014 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7622 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

A foreign affair

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
back-to-top-scroll