header-logo header-logo

29 July 2022 / George Sim
Issue: 7989 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Expert witness: single or joint?

George Sim discusses the pros & cons of single joint accountancy experts
  • Puts forward arguments for and against single joint experts.
  • Sets out a comparison with experts appointed on behalf of each of the parties.
  • Identifies procedural issues.

The use of Single Joint Experts (SJEs) is encouraged under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) with the court considering inter alia whether instructing SJEs is likely to help it to resolve issues more speedily and in a more cost-effective way than with separately instructed experts. This article explores general considerations which lawyers should take into account when instructing SJEs with particular regard to the involvement of forensic accountants and compares the practical implications of using SJEs with those of using experts instructed separately by each of the parties.

Agreed methodology or differing assumptions?

The extent to which expert accountancy opinion can be agreed between the parties will vary according to the type of case. Our experience of pension loss cases, for example, is that they generally involve calculations of the claimant’s post-tax

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

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll