Working with expert witnesses... is a new monthly article series. The series takes a look at the role of expert witnesses in a range of sectors from the perspective of the legal and other professionals who work with them. If you are interested in being featured in the series, you can contact us at policy@ewi.org.uk.
In the second article in the series, Thomas Hamilton, a Senior Solicitor at Thompsons Solicitors, discusses his experience of working with expert witnesses in serious injury claims.
Expert Evidence in Serious Injury Litigation: Perspective from the Claimant Side
Expert evidence plays a defining role in serious injury litigation. For those acting as expert witnesses, their opinions inform rehabilitation planning, guide case management and assist the court in understanding complex questions of causation, function and prognosis. The contribution of expert evidence extends well beyond the preparation of reports; it shapes the course of litigation and influences the practical support available to injured individuals at an early stage.
From a Claimant solicitor’s perspective, expert witnesses who combine clinical authority with independence, clarity and procedural discipline provide invaluable assistance to both parties and to the court. This article reflects on how expert evidence is used in serious injury claims and identifies aspects of practice that consistently enhance its value.
Early involvement and the rehabilitation context
Serious injury claims often begin at a point of profound disruption for Claimants and their families. Alongside investigation of liability, solicitors seek to secure interim funding to support rehabilitation as early as possible. Expert opinion frequently underpins those early applications and informs discussions around future need.
Multidisciplinary input is common. Depending on the injuries involved, experts may be drawn from neurology, neuro‑rehabilitation, psychiatry, psychology, orthopaedic and spinal surgery, radiology, urology, prosthetics and orthotics, care and occupational therapy, and accommodation and accessibility. When expert opinions are aligned in scope and timing, they contribute to a coherent account of injury and function that assists both rehabilitation planning and judicial case management under CPR Part 35.
Experts who understand the wider rehabilitation context are particularly well placed to frame opinions that are clinically sound and procedurally helpful.
Selection and Professional Attributes
In practice, solicitors rely on experts who demonstrate three consistent attributes: recognised expertise in their field, clear written communication and independence of thought. Authority provides confidence in the clinical foundation of the opinion, while clarity ensures that complex issues can be understood by judges and practitioners without specialist medical training.
Independence remains central. Experts who approach their instructions with balance, transparency and professional confidence enhance the credibility of their evidence at every stage, including joint discussions and oral evidence. Familiarity with CPR Part 35, Practice Direction 35 and the Guidance for the Instruction of Experts in Civil Claims supports that role and provides a shared framework for engagement between experts and legal teams.
Forming opinions that assist the court
Expert opinions that assist the court most effectively are those grounded in a thorough engagement with the evidential record. This commonly includes pre‑injury medical history, employment and educational records, benefits documentation, and witness statements from family members, carers or employers.
Where preexisting conditions or symptoms are present, experts are often asked to explain how the index accident has altered function and capacity in practical terms. Clear reasoning around acceleration, exacerbation or new injury, supported by reference to function and day-to-day impact, provides the court with a reliable basis for assessment.‑existing conditions or symptoms are present, experts are often asked to explain how the index accident has altered function and capacity in practical terms. Clear reasoning around acceleration, exacerbation or new injury, supported by reference to function and day‑to‑day impact, provides the court with a reliable basis for assessment.
Opinions that identify assumptions, acknowledge uncertainty and explain the reasoning process align closely with the expectations set out in PD35. Such transparency assists the court and supports constructive engagement between experts during the joint statement process.
Writing reports for a mixed professional audience
Medico‑legal reports are read by judges and practitioners from a wide range of backgrounds. Reports that combine clinical precision with clear structure and accessible language consistently prove most effective.
A well constructed Part 35 report is addressed to the court and organised so that instructions, sources, findings, analysis and conclusions are clearly distinguished. Technical terms are explained, the range of reasonable opinion is summarised where relevant, and reasons are given for the expert’s own conclusions. The prescribed declarations complete the report and reinforce its procedural integrity.‑constructed Part 35 report is addressed to the court and organised so that instructions, sources, findings, analysis and conclusions are clearly distinguished. Technical terms are explained, the range of reasonable opinion is summarised where relevant, and reasons are given for the expert’s own conclusions. The prescribed declarations complete the report and reinforce its procedural integrity.
Many experts find it helpful to maintain a focused narrative in the main body of the report, with detailed records, calculations and literature placed in appendices. This approach supports readability while preserving access to the underlying material.
Procedural Stages and Joint Work
Expert involvement often continues beyond the initial report. Written questions under CPR 35.6 form part of the evidence and benefit from the same care and precision as the original opinion. Joint discussions offer an opportunity to clarify issues and to refine areas of agreement and difference.
Joint statements that clearly record shared views and explain points of divergence with reference to evidence or literature assist the court in identifying the issues that require determination. Experts who approach this process with preparation and professional confidence contribute significantly to effective case management.
Timetabling and Communications
Many experts balance medico‑legal practice alongside substantial clinical commitments. In serious injury cases, the timing of expert evidence can have direct implications for rehabilitation funding, interim payments and court directions.
Clear and early communication supports effective planning. When timetables become challenging, timely engagement between experts and solicitors allows directions to be managed realistically and preserves momentum in the litigation. The principles set out in the CJC Guidance encourage this collaborative approach.
Trauma Informed Assessment
There is increasing recognition across clinical and legal professions of the importance of trauma‑informed practice. For individuals who have sustained serious injury, repeated exploration of the circumstances of the accident can have a lasting impact on wellbeing.
Thompsons Solicitors is a signatory to APIL’s Prevention of Re‑traumatisation Protocol (awaiting publication), which promotes proportionate and sensitive assessment. In practice, this involves providing experts with comprehensive factual material in advance, enabling preparation and reducing the need for repeated questioning. Exploration of the index event is undertaken where clinically and forensically justified and by professionals with appropriate training.
Most assessments focus on current presentation, functional ability and future need, supporting both clinical insight and the Claimant’s ongoing rehabilitation.
Concluding Observations
Expert witnesses make a central contribution to serious injury litigation. When clinical expertise is combined with independence, structured reasoning and clear communication, expert evidence supports rehabilitation, informs judicial decision‑making and enhances the fairness of the process.
For Claimant solicitors, experts who engage with the procedural framework, write with the court in mind and approach assessment with sensitivity and professionalism provide assistance of the highest order. Those qualities reflect the standards promoted by CPR Part 35, Practice Direction 35 and the Expert Witness Institute, and they continue to serve both justice and the individuals whose lives have been profoundly affected by injury.
About the author
Thomas Hamilton is a Senior Solicitor at Thompsons Solicitors. He represents Claimants with catastrophic injuries across Yorkshire and Humberside and is committed to evidence led rehabilitation and access to justice.