header-logo header-logo

07 April 2011 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7460 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Supreme Court experts?

For many expert witnesses, the decision of the Supreme Court in Jones v Kaney will make little immediate difference...

Chris Pamplin reflects on the decision in Jones v Kaney & predicts some unintended consequences

For many expert witnesses, the decision of the Supreme Court in Jones v Kaney [2011] UKSC 13, [2011] All ER (D) 346 (Mar) will make little immediate difference. Most expert witnesses, being conscientious professionals, will feel themselves unlikely to be found negligent and will carry professional indemnity insurance just in case. Indeed, they will view existing professional disciplinary risks as a greater concern.

The majority in the Supreme Court is dismissive of the risk that their decision will have a “chilling effect” on the supply of willing experts. But exposing expert witnesses to the potential distractions of vexatious suits from disgruntled litigants is never likely to encourage involvement in forensic work. It is the unquantifiable nature of this risk that so concerned Lord Hope and Lady Hale, as it should trouble anyone interested in the proper administration of justice.

A

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: Nick McDonnell, Kain Knight

NLJ Career Profile: Nick McDonnell, Kain Knight

Nick McDonnell of Kain Knight reflects on an unexpected legal career, his drive to support vulnerable clients and the surprising pleasures of watching nothing happen

Mayo Wynne Baxter—Angela Arnold

Mayo Wynne Baxter—Angela Arnold

Mayo Wynne Baxter strengthens property team with new partner appointment

WilmerHale—Jeremy Kosky & Charlie Lightfoot

WilmerHale—Jeremy Kosky & Charlie Lightfoot

WilmerHale expands London disputes capabilities with addition of two leading partners

NEWS
Lawyers have welcomed the Lord Chancellor’s reverse-ferret on jury reforms, but expressed ‘serious concerns’ about the decision to exclude fraud trials
From ‘rats in the robing room’ to ‘overworked’ judges and a shortage of court staff, barristers have aired their concerns about the state of the justice system
The use of agentic artificial intelligence (AI) poses ‘significant risks’ across the justice system, public services and government, and current regulation is ‘poorly suited’ to control it, experts have warned
The solicitors’ regulator has paused controversial plans to exclude owner-managers from compliance officer roles
The government has launched a £16m legal support grant to support 48 frontline legal advice organisations supporting people facing eviction, problem debt, benefit disputes and family breakdown
back-to-top-scroll