header-logo header-logo

A matter of opinion

24 January 2014 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7591 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail
web_pamplin

Is expert opinion produced outside the court process admissible? Chris Pamplin reports

Is expert opinion contained in third party documents (produced by entirely independent persons, extraneous to the proceedings and the parties) admissible as evidence in civil cases where the maker of the document is not to be called, indeed, may not even be clearly identified?

Air crash investigations

In Rogers v Hoyle [2013] EWHC 1409 (QB); [2013] All ER (D) 21 (Sep), an application was made to exclude from evidence a report produced by the Air Accident Investigation Branch of the Department for Transport (AAIB). The case involved a claim by executors of a Mr Rogers, who had been killed when a Tiger Moth aircraft in which he was a passenger, crashed in Dorset. The claimant alleged that the accident was caused by the negligence of the defendant, Mr Hoyle, who was the pilot of the aircraft.

The purpose of air accident investigations is the prevention of accidents and not to apportion blame or liability. The crash had been

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll