06 October 2020 Priya Vaidya 2846 Case Updates Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd, Re [2020] EWHC 2299 (Ch) by Priya Vaidya Relevance: General Topic: Expert’s reasoning The Court was provided with the expert’s conclusions, but without being provided with the information to test whether any difference between the two companies was in LGAS’s or in ReAssure’s favour or how the conclusion that the difference was not material was justified. The court should therefore have sufficient information, not so as to review the independent expert’s “workings”, but so as to be able to assess that Mr Gillespie’s conclusions in this important respect are soundly based. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login Share Print Tags 11. Report Writing Related articles Civil Justice Council’s Use of AI for Preparing Court Documents: Final Report The combative paediatric expert remains anonymous Craigard (Dartford) Limited & Anor v Westbury Homes (Holdings) Limited & Anor [2026] EWHC 2453 (TCC) A medical report to which the court gave little weight DLP Ltd v Coram UK Holding Ltd [2026] EWHC 2448 (IPEC) (25 September 2026) Switch article Griffiths v TUI UK Ltd [2020] EWHC 2268 (QB) Previous Article Akhmedova v Akhmedov [2020] EWHC 2235 (Fam), 2020 WL 04742216 Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.