header-logo header-logo

19 February 2021
Issue: 7921 / Categories: Legal News , Expert Witness , Technology , Profession
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: What about the experts?

39809
Writing in this week’s NLJ, Mark Solon asks: where do expert witnesses fit into the new Master of the Rolls’ promised ‘radical rethink’ of civil justice?

Sir Geoffrey Vos QC has underlined his commitment to technological solutions, commenting that ‘the UK legal community needs to be ambitious in terms of digitalisation’. However, Solon says, expert witnesses ‘are not lawyers, but specialists assisting lawyers and courts, and with a day job. How will they keep up with a maelstrom of changes?’

Nonetheless, Solon also highlights the benefits of IT for the expert witness process, as well as pointing out some potential new income streams for them.

Issue: 7921 / Categories: Legal News , Expert Witness , Technology , Profession
printer mail-details
RELATED ARTICLES

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace

Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall

Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei

Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert

NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll