header-logo header-logo

The credulity of experts

25 October 2024 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 8091 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness , Personal injury , Damages
printer mail-detail
194044
Dr Chris Pamplin looks at a shocking case in which experts failed to spot the claimant’s exaggerations
  • Experts should not assume the people with whom they interact are fundamentally honest.
  • Covers Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Limited.
  • Warns experts not to lose sight of causation and to say which complaints are caused by the tort, which are not, and which they can’t establish either way.

Most experts might assume that when taking instructions, the people with whom they interact are fundamentally honest. As was demonstrated in the recent case of Williams-Henry v Associated British Ports Holdings Limited [2024] EWHC 806 (KB), [2024] All ER (D) 44 (Apr), there are dangers for experts who make this assumption.

The claimant had suffered a traumatic brain injury when she fell from Aberavon Pier. The pier was found to have been insufficiently guarded by railings. The defendant admitted liability. However, while settling the level of damages, the court found the claimant had greatly inflated the value of her claim.

Under

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

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Boies Schiller Flexner—Tim Smyth

Firm promotes London international arbitration specialist to partnership

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Katten Muchin Rosenman—James Davison & Victoria Procter

Firm bolsters restructuring practice with senior London hires

HFW—Guy Marrison

HFW—Guy Marrison

Global aviation disputes practice boosted by London partner hire

NEWS
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
A construction defect claim in the Court of Appeal offers a sharp lesson in pleading discipline. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains how a catastrophically drafted schedule of loss derailed otherwise viable claims. Across the areas explored in this week's column, the message is consistent: clarity, economy and proper pleading matter more than ever
back-to-top-scroll