19 November 2024 Keith Rix 322 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 10. Report Writing12. Experts Discussions and Joint StatementsCryptocurrency Related articles Podcast Episode 7: Review of 2024 When expert evidence falls well below the standard of a competent expert witness EWI Refreshes Core Training offering Transparency and Open Justice Board Key Objectives An unsafe conviction with flawed DNA evidence 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.