header-logo header-logo

25 October 2007 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7294 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Limiting the evidence

What is the expert’s role in gathering and presenting evidence? Chris Pamplin reports

Limiting the amount and scope of expert evidence has long been one of the functions of the case management procedures of the civil courts. The time and expense involved in the provision of expert evidence means that the courts must have regard to the proportionality of any request. Indeed, the court should refuse permission where reasons for the request are viewed as frivolous.

However, given that the need for additional evidence is sometimes critical to the court’s ability to make an informed decision, and that the expert evidence itself is often of a highly technical nature, two questions arise:
- How should the courts deal with such requests?
- How much influence should the experts or the parties have upon the court’s decision?

If an expert feels that there is insufficient evidence before the court to prove or disprove a case, does the expert have discretion to request that further tests be carried out? If so, what is the expert’s role in that

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: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll