09 October 2024 Sean Mosby 273 Case Updates Chifley Holdings Ltd (BVI) v The Commissioners For HMRC [2024] UKUT 301 (LC) bySean Mosby Summary The judge found that it was without justification and entirely unecessary for an expert to question the opposing expert's professionalism and motives in selecting evidence, noting that this approach was unhelpful for the tribunal. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the Judgement Share Print Tags 05. Rules and Regulations10. Report Writing13. Changing your opinion12. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements14. Giving Oral Evidence15. Criticism and Complaints09. Records Assessments and Site VisitsSurveyorsValuation Related articles Is it within the remit of an expert to decide which witness of fact they believe or disbelieve? When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert. The dangers of a considerable burden of expert work Preliminary (pre-report) experts’ meetings A Day in the Life of a Medicolegal Expert Witness Switch article Fact finding by experts Previous Article Professor Keith Rix and Alison Somek awarded Honorary Fellowship of the EWI Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.