06 October 2020 Priya Vaidya 1278 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 11. Report Writing Related articles Rebecca Hepworth v Dr Amanda Coates [2025] EWHC 1907 (KB) Failed extraction of a wisdom tooth Benjamin Hetherington (by his father and litigation friend Gary Hetherington) v Raymond Fell & Anor [2025] EWHC 1487 (KB) Bevan v Ministry of Defence [2025] EWHC 1145 (KB) Andrew Cannestra v Mclaren Automotive Events Limited [2025] EWHC 1844 (KB) 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.