19 November 2024 Keith Rix 2901 Case Updates When the joint statement is no more than really two statements, one from each expert. by Keith 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 Cryptocurrency11. Report Writing13. Experts Discussions and Joint Statements Related articles DLP Ltd v Coram UK Holding Ltd [2026] EWHC 2448 (IPEC) (25 September 2026) Information publicly available on the internet - 'Digital Open Source Information' A Day in the Life of an Oil and Commodities Expert Witness A substantial limit to its evidential value The mandatory duty on range of opinion 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.