DLP Ltd v Coram UK Holding Ltd [2026] EWHC 2448 (IPEC) (25 September 2026) DLP Ltd v Coram UK Holding Ltd [2026] EWHC 2448 (IPEC) (25 September 2026)

DLP Ltd v Coram UK Holding Ltd [2026] EWHC 2448 (IPEC) (25 September 2026)

The Claimant asserted that the Defendant had infringed their patent for an electric shower-waster pump and control unit. The trial related to...
EWI awards three Honorary Fellowships EWI awards three Honorary Fellowships

EWI awards three Honorary Fellowships

David Cowan, Leam Craig. and Kathryn Newns have been recognised for their contribution to the Expert Witness community.  
Podcast Episode 31: 30 years of Expert Evidence Podcast Episode 31: 30 years of Expert Evidence

Podcast Episode 31: 30 years of Expert Evidence

This month we have a special episode to celebrate 30 years since the Expert Witness Institute was launched on 8 November 2026. We are going to look...
Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd [2023] UKSC 2 Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd [2023] UKSC 2

Sara & Hossein Asset Holdings Ltd v Blacks Outdoor Retail Ltd [2023] UKSC 2

The case concerned the non-payment by a tenant of a commercial service charge. In considering the tenant’s permitted contractual defences of “manifest...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Blackpool Borough Council v RR [2026] EWFC 69
Case Updates

Blackpool Borough Council v RR [2026] EWFC 69

Laura Langley, 38, was alleged to have killed her seven-week-old daughter Edith who collapsed at the family home in Blackpool, Lancashire, in the early hours of 20 November 2020. The Judge found that the expert evidence in the case of Professor G, of Professor N and of Professor D each at times fell below the high standard expected of expert witnesses giving evidence before the family court in this jurisdiction. This judgment illustrates a number of important lessons for expert witnesses. The criticisms go well beyond a disagreement between experts—they concern the duties of an expert to the court. An expert who appears to defend a predetermined hypothesis rather than follow the evidence risks losing credibility entirely, regardless of their qualifications or experience. This judgment illustrates that methodological rigour, transparency, and impartiality are essential to persuasive expert testimony.