header-logo header-logo

23 June 2011 / David Smith
Issue: 7471 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Humble opinions

Expert evidence must distinguish fact from opinion, says David Smith

There is an important distinction made between types of evidence in England and Wales—witness evidence that relates to fact and evidence that relates to opinion. The first is admissible while the second is not. The distinction is often hard to spot.

In truth, all evidence is opinion evidence to some extent in that the same events may appear to occur in an entirely different manner due to a difference in the way they recall or interpret the events, or because of a conscious or unconscious bias. The court resolves this problem by grouping issues of interpretation and bias under the general heading of witness credibility.

Opinion v fact

For example, a passenger in a car cannot give factual evidence about the speed that the car is travelling unless they have actually looked at the speedometer. They can give factual evidence about how frequently lampposts were passing the windows and as to how the car was moving in relation to other vehicles on the road,

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

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen—Liz Giles

Bell Yard Kysen appoints senior legal PR and ex-government communications adviser, Liz Giles

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott—Lee Edwards

Clarke Willmott boosts Southampton commercial property team with addition of partner Lee Edwards

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors—four promotions

Lime Solicitors announces four promotions

NEWS
The Attorney General, Ellie Reeves KC MP, and Solicitor General, Andy Slaughter KC MP, marked the 25th anniversary of Pro Bono Week by joining lawyers, charities, students and parliamentarians at events celebrating voluntary legal work
Witness evidence can be compromised by AI before a solicitor sees the draft, leaving safeguards focused on authorship incomplete
Possession claims are entering a new digital era, with procedural traps awaiting practitioners who assume familiar rules still govern every step
A polished legal defence may owe more to artificial intelligence than legal merit—and creditors risk paying the price in delay and expense
An indemnity costs battle with a £20m gap could reopen an important question: what weight should an approved budget carry?
back-to-top-scroll