14 August News How should Experts disclose criticisms when they are frequently unaware of the outcome of the case? 07. Receiving Instructions, 16. Criticism and Complaints, 08. Working with Instructing Parties The judgement from The Honourable Mr Justice Trower asserts that Expert Witnesses have a duty to disclose previous criticisms of their evidence in judgments.
14 August Case Updates Rebecca Hepworth v Dr Amanda Coates [2025] EWHC 1907 (KB) 16. Criticism and Complaints, 17. Maintaining your professional edge, 10. Records Assessments and Site Visits, 11. Report Writing, 14. Changing your opinion, 08. Working with Instructing Parties, 13. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements, 15. Giving Oral Evidence The Claimant sought damages for clinical negligence from the Defendant who, she asserted, failed to diagnose red flag symptoms of cauda equina syndrome at a face to face consultation. The Claimant’s neurorehabilitation expert prepared his reports, engaged in an expert discussion, and signed the Joint Statement, without having seen the Claimant’s witness statement or the reports of other relevant experts.
12 August News Access to Justice Inquiry Legal Aid, Justice Committee, Access to Justice The House of Commons, Justice Committee has published a Call for Evidence for its Inquiry on Access to Justice. The Inquiry will examine how advice and legal services are adapting to secure access to justice across civil, criminal, and family law, and the impacts of the cyber-attack on the Legal Aid Agency.
12 August Case Updates Failed extraction of a wisdom tooth Clinical negligence, Scotland, 16. Criticism and Complaints, 10. Records Assessments and Site Visits, 11. Report Writing, 14. Changing your opinion, 15. Giving Oral Evidence Although this is a case of alleged dental negligence and can be usefully read in full not only by dental experts, but by dentists, oral surgeons and students of dentistry, it is also of some general significance not just for experts who provide evidence in Scotland, for whom the exposition of Scots negligence law is invaluable and civil procedure significantly different, but for lessons about expert evidence in clinical negligence cases generally. Gallagher v Clement (National Personal Injury Court) [2025] SCEDIN 035
11 August Day in the life A day in the life of an Accommodation Expert Witness Personal injury, Clinical negligence, Architecture, accommodation Marisa Shek is a Healthcare Architect and owner of Shek Architects. As an Expert Witness, she specialises in the field of accommodation for disabled people in personal injury and clinical negligence litigation. Here, she tells us how she became an Expert Witness and why her work continues to inspire her.
7 August Case Updates Benjamin Hetherington (by his father and litigation friend Gary Hetherington) v Raymond Fell & Anor [2025] EWHC 1487 (KB) 16. Criticism and Complaints, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 15. Giving Oral Evidence The judge found that an expert on risk assessment adopted an overly strict and slightly unrealistic approach in assessing the adequacy of a risk assessment conducted by a cycling club.
5 August Case Updates Bevan v Ministry of Defence [2025] EWHC 1145 (KB) Tinnitus, Acoustic Trauma, 11. Report Writing, 15. Giving Oral Evidence Apart from the oft-made point about the importance for experts of the chronology, especially in cases where the issue is causation or clinical negligence, there is nothing in this case for healthcare experts in general. It is an importance case for ENT experts because several similar claims are due to be heard over the next months.
31 July Case Updates Andrew Cannestra v Mclaren Automotive Events Limited [2025] EWHC 1844 (KB) 16. Criticism and Complaints, 10. Records Assessments and Site Visits, 06. Rules and Regulations, 11. Report Writing, 14. Changing your opinion, 15. Giving Oral Evidence The judge found that the Defendant’s expert in snowmobile operations was a partial witness who acted as an advocate for the Defendant’s case. He not only ignored the Claimant’s evidence and adopted the snowmobile guides’ evidence, but positively sought to persuade the Court to find facts in the Defendant’s favour.
29 July Case Updates Extradition and suicide risk Psychology, Extradition, Suicide risk, Psychiatry, Turner proposition 4 This case is important for two reasons. It illustrates that having “no control over actions” and “not making a rational decision" to end his life can be construed as satisfying Turner proposition 4. It makes clear that Turner proposition (4) is not directed at the general background or lead-up to a suicide attempt but is focused on the moment in time when suicide is attempted. Hebda v District Court in Krakow, Poland [2025] EWHC 860 (Admin)
25 July News The Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 Criminal Procedure Rules, CrimPR, 06. Rules and Regulations The Criminal Procedure Rule Committee has published a new consolidation of the Criminal Procedure Rules and an accompanying guide. The new Rules will come into force on 6 October 2025.