header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
08 April 2022 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7974 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Expert witness: The indisputable expert?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
77734
A sigh of relief for expert witnesses: Mark Solon welcomes the High Court’s judgment in Radia v Marks
  • The High Court has dismissed a professional negligence claim against a medical expert, finding that the expert’s duty of care did not extend to protecting the claimant from the risk of an adverse credibility finding.

The 2011 Supreme Court case of Jones v Kaney [2011] UKSC 13, [2011] All ER (D) 346 (Mar) is rarely far from an expert’s mind, reversing 400 years of history by deciding that expert witnesses are not immune from being sued in both contract and negligence. However, experts may breathe a sigh of relief as the High Court in Radia v Marks [2022] EWHC 145 (QB), [2022] All ER (D) 92 (Jan) dismissed a claim against a medical expert who gave evidence as a joint expert in an employment tribunal case, highlighting the difficulties of successfully suing an expert for professional negligence.

What are the facts of this case?

In 2015, the claimant took his former

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
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll