header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
05 July 2018 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7800 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession , Data protection
printer mail-detail

Witness protection

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7800_solon

Mark Solon outlines why expert witnesses need to be GDPR compliant

  • All expert witnesses, as individuals or as part of an organisation, need to be GDPR compliant.
  • To ensure compliance, experts need to review their personal data processing activities in granular detail and identify risks.
  • If experts do not comply with GDPR they may find solicitors may not instruct them as compliance is mandatory, they may face sanctions including heavy fines and they may be sued as well as experiencing suffering reputational damage.

All solicitors must now be tired of hearing about the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) but I am sorry to say they need to know a little bit more. This relates to GDPR and expert witnesses.

On 25 May 2018, GPDR came into force. This new regulation is one of the biggest shakeups of personal data privacy rules since the birth of the internet. Under GDPR, individuals will have more control over their personal information and the level of privacy and security protections will increase. So, does GDPR affect

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
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
Read All
‘Lost years’ precedent overturned
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
NLJ this week: Neutral counsel in a polarised age
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’
NLJ this week: Short lets & sharp covenants
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
NLJ this week: Justice at the algorithm’s edge
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
NLJ this week: When ‘milk’ really means milk
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
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll