Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin of the UK Register of Expert Witnesses explores the implications for expert witnesses. He highlights a recent family court case in which a journalist sought access to expert psychological reports while investigating allegations linked to parental alienation.
Although the court recognised a strong public interest in understanding how such evidence is used, it also acknowledged the risks of publication. Sensitive personal information, psychological assessments and contact details required protection. The judge ultimately allowed limited disclosure, permitting publication of conclusions while preserving confidentiality elsewhere.
Pamplin argues that open justice remains a core constitutional principle, but warns that unrestricted publication could undermine candour among those providing information to experts. As transparency expands, experts may need to rethink what personal information appears in their reports.
