header-logo header-logo

Forewarned is forearmed

04 April 2014 / Sandy Mackay
Issue: 7601 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail
web_mackay

Sandy Mackay highlights the benefits of early expert witness meetings

Recently, the courts have been in favour of instructing meetings between experts of like discipline before formal hearings, in order to narrow the issues between the parties and get a measure of agreement. These meetings should be held before the experts’ reports have been written or exchanged, and are intended to explore the middle ground, examine where differences of opinion are present, and discuss the underlying facts. However, this approach requires a radical change in the way that some cases are run, notably clinical negligence actions.

Where to begin?

It is helpful to begin these meetings with a review of the history of the dispute and a review of the differences between the parties, noting down where there can be agreement on basic facts such as location, timing and applicable standards. This enables a factual discussion without consideration at this stage of blame or liability, encouraging an open exchange of views. It often brings to light significant details that one side or the

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

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Pillsbury—Lord Garnier KC

Appointment of former Solicitor General bolsters corporate investigations and white collar practice

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Hall & Wilcox—Nigel Clark

Firm strengthens international strategy with hire of global relations consultant

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Slater Heelis—Sylviane Kokouendo & Shazia Ashraf

Partner and associate join employment practice

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll