06 October 2020 Priya Vaidya 786 Case Updates Legal and General Assurance Society Ltd, Re [2020] EWHC 2299 (Ch) byPriya 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 10. Report Writing 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 Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v Khan & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 531 Pfizer Inc v Uniqure Biopharma BV [2024] EWHC 2672 (Pat) 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.