19 November 2024 Keith Rix 591 Case Updates When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert. byKeith Rix Commentary Several times I took part in experts’ meetings or discussions for which I drafted, before the meeting or discussion, the joint statement but, instead of engaging in a discussion of the issues, the adverse party’s experts said that they would come back to me with their text to insert in the draft joint statements. Learning points: An experts’ meeting or discussion requires real engagement on the outstanding issues. Two statements, one from each expert, are not a joint statement. Waiting to concede in oral testimony points that could have been agreed in the experts’ discussion or meeting is not in the interests of justice. Ask yourself if your methodology has a principled basis. 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 Judgment Share Print Tags 11. Report Writing13. Experts Discussions and Joint StatementsCryptocurrency Related articles Navigating the excessive difference in valuations from two Expert Quantity Surveyors Expert evidence in judicial review proceedings Lost in translation A Day in the Life of an Aerial Imagery Expert Elevate Your Expertise: Join the EWI's Inaugural Study Day in London Switch article Podcast Episode 6: In Conversation with Giles Eyre Previous Article Procedure for Determining Mental Capacity in Civil Proceedings Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.