header-logo header-logo

12 November 2013
Issue: 7584 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Resolution: expert witness standards must not rule out "new" experts

Child experts must meet minimum standards but less experienced experts should not be excluded

New national standards for expert witnesses in children cases must not prevent first-time experts giving evidence, Resolution has said.

The standards, drawn up by the Family Justice Council, will be implemented in April. They include ensuring the expert has appropriate knowledge, is regulated or accredited to a registered body, has received “appropriate training”, has been active in the area of work, and seeks feedback after the case is finished. They are designed to improve the quality of evidence and reduce delays in the courts. 

A Resolution spokesperson said the organisation “agrees that experts involved in all family proceedings should meet minimum standards” but that “such standards should not preclude less experienced and ‘new’ experts providing evidence and the bodies regulating experts should ensure that suitable training is provided for new experts. 

“Solicitors should comply with their own standards relating to choice and instruction of experts but there should be no undue burden on solicitors, for example imposed by the Legal Aid Agency, to verify that an expert meets the standards.”

Mark Solon, managing director of expert witness training group Bond Solon Training, says the new requirement to seek feedback from the instructing solicitor is “pie in the sky”.

“Unless the solicitor is being paid to give feedback, he is unlikely to do so,” he says. “It is impossible for the judge to give feedback as it might provide grounds for an appeal.”

Solon also notes that “appropriate training”—a requirement under the new standards—is not adequately defined.

Unnecessary commissioning of additional written statements, clarifications and court appearances by expert witnesses is a major cause of delay in the family courts, according to the Ministry of Justice, which introduced rule changes in January to restrict the use of experts to when “necessary” to resolve the case.

 

Issue: 7584 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers—4 Brick Court

42BR Barristers to be joined by leading family law set, 4 Brick Court, this summer

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Winckworth Sherwood—Rubianka Winspear

Real estate and construction energy offering boosted by partner hire

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Gateley Legal—Daniel Walsh

Firm bolsters real estate team with partner hire in Birmingham

NEWS
A wave of housing and procedural reforms is set to test the limits of tribunal capacity. In his latest Civil Way column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold charts sweeping change as the Renters’ Rights Act 2025 begins biting
Plans to reduce jury trials risk missing the real problem in the criminal justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, David Wolchover of Ridgeway Chambers argues the crown court backlog is fuelled not by juries but weak cases slipping through a flawed ‘50%’ prosecution test
Emerging technologies may soon transform how courts determine truth in deeply personal disputes. In this week's NLJ, Madhavi Kabra of 1 Hare Court and Harry Lambert of Outer Temple Chambers explore how neurotechnology could reshape family law
A controversial protest case has reignited debate over the limits of free expression. In NLJ this week, Nicholas Dobson examines a Quran-burning incident testing public order law
The courts have drawn a firm line under attempts to extend arbitration appeals. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed of the University of Leicester highlights that if the High Court refuses permission under s 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996, that is the end
back-to-top-scroll