11 February Case Updates A mother's malign influence on her children 10. Report Writing, 09. Records Assessments and Site Visits, Toxicology, Haematology Paediatrics, Pharmacology, Respiratory medicine This is a case which will assume much greater importance for the 15 points of practice and practical steps that the judge decided can help reduce the risk of well-meaning professionals falling into pitfalls that hinder the identification of safeguarding issues at an early stage than as a case with learning points for experts. For some of the experts in the fields from which jointly appointed experts were instructed, it illustrates how their evidence is tested and applied in a case of suspected fabricated or induced illness (FII). Re N (Children: Fact Finding - Perplexing Presentation/Fabricated or Induced Illness) [2024] EWFC 326
14 January Case Updates Justice for people with a hearing impairment Capacity, 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 07. Working with Instructing Parties, Hearing impairment A psychiatrist whose evidence had often been admitted in capacity cases was assisted in this case of a hearing-impaired person by an interpreter who had British Sign Language (BSL) Level 1 training. Her assessment was subsequently criticised as she conducted the assessment without ‘suitable specialist learning support’. For psychiatrists and psychologists, the case illustrates the importance, in the case of some hearing-impaired subjects, of being assisted, or of the assessment being carried out, by a psychologist or psychiatrist who has experience of the assessment and treatment of hearing-disabled people. Oldham Metropolitan Borough Council v KZ (Rev1) [2024] EWCOP 72 (T3)
7 January Case Updates Alan Prescott-Brann v Chelsea and Westminster’s Hospital NHS Foundation Trust & Anor [2024] EWHC 3314 (KB) 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 13. Changing your opinion The Appellant was given permission to change neurology experts after the judge found that the application was not so late as to be prejudicial to the Respondents, and that the Appellant was not engaging in expert shopping.
19 December Case Updates When expert evidence falls well below the standard of a competent expert witness Psychology, Psychiatry, 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 13. Changing your opinion, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints, 09. Records Assessments and Site Visits The judge found that the evidence of the claimants' psychological expert fell well below the standard to be expected of a competent expert witness, both as to form and as to substance. Rashpal Samrai & Ors v Rajinder Kalia [2024] EWHC 3143 (KB)
13 December Case Updates An unsafe conviction with flawed DNA evidence 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints, Bermuda, DNA Evidence, Privy Council In this Bermudan case, the appellant successfully appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council to have his convictions quashed because of errors in the collection, examination and interpretation of the DNA expert evidence used in the trial. Julian Washington (Appellant) v The King (Respondent) (Bermuda) [2024] UKPC 34
5 December Case Updates One tray short of a baker’s dozen: injury on the production line Orthopaedics, 10. Report Writing, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, biomechanics This case concerns an important boundary matter that sometimes arises for orthopaedic experts in relation to biomechanics and ergonomics. These are areas of expertise for which the orthopaedic surgeon’s ‘working knowledge’ may be sufficient, thereby avoiding the time and expense of instructing a further expert just as in cases where knowledge and experience of orthopaedics in general is sufficient and it is not necessary to instruct an orthopaedic sub-specialist. Swierzko v Mathiesons Bakery Ltd [2024] SC EDIN 43
27 November Case Updates T (Fresh Evidence on Appeal), Re [2024] EWCA Civ 1384 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 06. Receiving Instructions, 15. Criticism and Complaints, Fresh evidence on appeal The father sought permission to rely on fresh evidence that he had a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder in an appeal against care and placement orders made in respect of his daughter. The judge reviewed the law on admitting fresh evidence on appeal before applying it to the case.
21 November Case Updates Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or disbelieve? Range of Opinion, Cross-examination, 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints The judge noted that the expert readily accepted that integral to his reasoning was that he did not believe the claimant as to the symptoms he had suffered and, probably, teh claimant's account of the incident. In the judge's view, it is entirely outside the remit of an expert to decide which witnesses of fact he believes or disbelieves. Allard v Govia Thameslink Railway Ltd [2024] EWHC 2227 (KB)
19 November Case Updates When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert. 10. Report Writing, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, Cryptocurrency The 'joint statement' prepared by two blockchain experts was really two statements, one from each expert. Fabrizio D'Aloia v Persons Unknown Category A & Ors [2024] EWHC 2342 (Ch)
14 November Case Updates The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work Orthopaedics, Paediatrics, 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 13. Changing your opinion, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 15. Criticism and Complaints, Pathology, Histopathology, Radiology The court found that a highly respected and hugely experienced histopathologist expert witness, who was overburdened with work, had made errors in his examination of the forensic material and closed his mind to possible or probable accidental causes for the injuries identified. London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham v G [2024] EWHC 2200 (Fam)