13 February Case Updates Mantir Singh Sahota v Albinder Singh Sahota & Ors [2024] EWHC 2165 (Ch) 13. Changing your opinion, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 15. Criticism and Complaints, Forensic Accounting The judge found that the forensic accounting expert’s approach of forming an opinion as to the value of the Company, then carrying out a detailed calculation and only if it matches his initial opinion accepting it, undermined the credibility and reliability of his opinion as to the value of the Company.
21 January Case Updates Rebecca Lochrie v Matthew Edwards Judgment G48YJ355 14. Giving Oral Evidence, Laser Eye Surgery, LASIK The Claimant alleged that the Defendant acted negligently in obtaining her consent for laser eye surgery including failing to adequately investigate her ophthalmic condition prior to the surgery.
20 January Day in the life A Day in the Life of an Emergency Medicine Expert Witness 10. Report Writing, 07. Working with Instructing Parties, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, Accident and Emergency Colin Holburn is an EWI fellow, governor and founding member. A consultant in accident and emergency medicine, he has been practising as an Expert Witness for over 30 years. He tells us why he still loves Expert work and shares his advice for those interested in getting into the field.
15 January Podcast Podcast Episode 8: Re-evaluating your opinion 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 13. Changing your opinion, 07. Working with Instructing Parties, 11. Responding to questions, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence In the 8th episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we discuss re-evaluating your opinion. We look at possible reasons why you might wish to re-evaluate your opinion and the stages in the proceedings where re-evaluation is most likely to occur, before hearing from three senior judges on how re-evaluating your opinion can sometimes be positive for your expert evidence, but may also be disastrous.
19 December Podcast Podcast Episode 7: Review of 2024 Credibility, Range of Opinion, Fundamental dishonesty, 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, 04. Alternative Dispute Resolution In the last podcast for 2024, we look back at the ten key issues for expert witnesses that we've seen over the course of 2024, and highlight the ten things to look out for in 2025. From knowing and complying with your duties, to reevaluating and changing you opinion and handling fundamental dishonesty, this year in review has it all.
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)
19 December News EWI Refreshes Core Training offering Legal role of an expert witness, 10. Report Writing, 12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, 16. Maintaining your professional edge The Expert Witness Institute (EWI) is excited to announce a refresh of its core training offering.
13 December News Transparency and Open Justice Board Key Objectives 05. Rules and Regulations, 10. Report Writing, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, Transparency and Open Justice Board is now engaging on its proposed Key Objectives. The Key Objectives represent the high-level outcomes that, once finalised, will guide the Board’s work. They will be used to identify areas where changes can and should be made, as well as to measure the outcomes from any change programme.
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
10 December Case Updates Non-freezing cold injury 05. Rules and Regulations, 14. Giving Oral Evidence, Non freezing cold injury This was one case brought to trial in the multi-claimant non-freezing cold injury (NFCI) litigation. The case illustrates the challenges for experts when the clinical condition in issue is rarely encountered (or at least rarely recognised) in normal NHS practice. The detail of this judgment may be of interest only to neurologists and vascular surgeons but makes useful reading for any expert instructed in a case where non-freezing cold injury is in issue. Fraser v Ministry of Defence [2024] EWHC 2977 (KB)