header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
28 January 2022 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7964 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Expert witness: No right of reply?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
70036
Dr Chris Pamplin looks at a recent ECtHR judgment that highlights the unfairness in judicial criticism of expert witnesses & offers a possible solution
  • Addressing the unfairness often seen with judicial criticism of experts.
  • The Hamid procedure.

One of the more serious sanctions an expert criticised by the court might face is a complaint being made to their professional body. Many will remember cases, such as that of Professor Roy Meadow and Dr Waney Squier (eg see ‘Confronting dogma’, 167 NLJ 7741, p19) where judicial criticism led to damaging proceedings before professional tribunals.

Unfairness of judicial criticism of experts

Given the often far-reaching effect of judicial criticism, it is, perhaps, surprising that experts subjected to it have little or no recourse to reply prior to a complaint being lodged. Their first opportunity to respond may come only once they face a duly constituted tribunal of their professional body. By that time, the damage may already have been done.

In the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) decision in Gardiner

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Arc Pensions Law—Matthew Swynnerton

Chair of the Association of Pension Lawyers joins as partner

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Ampa Group—Kamal Chauhan

Group names Shakespeare Martineau partner head of Sheffield office

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Blake Morgan—four promotions

Four legal directors promoted to partner across UK offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll