header-logo header-logo

04 June 2010
Categories: Case law , Judicial line , In Court
printer mail-detail

Joint expert—no fee

A jointly instructed sole expert’s fees are to be paid equally by each of the parties under a court order.

A jointly instructed sole expert’s fees are to be paid equally by each of the parties under a court order. Where neither party pays anything, does the court have the power to impose a sanction at the request of the expert or must the expert sue in contract?

The court could properly impose an appropriate stay until the expert’s fee had been paid in the exercise of its case management powers. However, this might raise difficulties as there could be some dispute between the parties or one of them and the expert as to, for example,  the amount of the expert’s charges or the standard of the expert’s service. It would be unfortunate if the court became involved in satellite litigation between the parties and the expert. The better course would be for the expert to make his independent claim in contract against the parties who instructed him and to seek an interim injunction forbidding 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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll