Summary

The court noted that the jointly instructed expert demonstrated a clear lack of understanding of both CPR 35 and the duties owned to the court by an expert in allowing someone else in this firm to answer CPR 35 questions on his behalf. His report was also entirely equivocal on the key issues and therefore offered little or no assistance to the court.

Learning points

Learning points for experts

• Ensure that you understand your duties and responsibilities under the applicable procedural rules, practice directions, and guidance.

• You are responsible for the production of your expert evidence. It is not appropriate to allow someone else, such as another employee at your firm, to answer CPR Part 35 questions on your behalf.

• An expert report that is entirely equivocal on the key issues is likely to be or little or no assistance to the court.

Learning points for instructing parties

• Ensure that you understand the applicable rules and regulations for the provision of expert evidence before making procedural arguments about the inadmissibility of “expert evidence”.

• A document that conveys the facts perceived by the authors about IP addresses is admissible as factual evidence, not expert evidence.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login