Tag Archives: Expert witness

CROSS-EXAMINATION OF EXPERTS IN PATENT CASES: SHOULD BE SHORT AND FAIR

In his judgment today in Merck Sharp and Dhome Limited -v- Shionig & Co Limited [2016] EWHC 2989 (Pat) Mr Justice Arnold made some observations about the cross-examination of expert witnesses. These related to experts in patent cases, they are also of more general interest. “… in my experience too much time is spent by […]

IF ONLY SOMEONE WOULD WRITE A BOOK ON EXPERTS…

There have been many occasions on this blog where I have commented on expert evidence. The links below show many cases where experts have caused major problems (usually for the party instructing them). There are numerous reports of cases where an expert has gone awry, sometimes badly awry (on one occasion the expert simply fled […]

WHAT IS MEANT BY AN “INDEPENDENT” EXPERT? CASES ON EXPERTS THIS WEEK III

In Hopkinson -v- Hickton [2016] EWCA Civ 1057 the Court of Appeal considered what was meant by an “independent” expert. KEY POINTS The fact that a valuer, appointed to value a property by the parties under the terms of a Tomlin Order,  had another involvement with the property in question did not mean that the […]

THE INTERACTION BETWEEN LAWYER AND EXPERT: CASES ON EXPERTS THIS WEEK II

We have already looked at the decision of Mr Justice Roth in Agents’ Mutual Limited -v- Gascoigne Halman [2016] CAT 21 in relation to costs budgeting. Here I want to isolate one aspect of that budgeting exercise – in relation to experts.  This aspect of the interaction between lawyers and experts is of importance both generally […]

EXPERT EVIDENCE NOT NECESSARY: CASES ON EXPERTS THIS WEEK 1

In Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca -v- Xstrate Limited [2016] EWHC 2757 (QB) Mr Justice Foskett refused an application to rely on an expert witness.  The case was unusual, however the principles are universal. The questions were whether there was an area of “expertise” which the expert could assist and whether the proposed evidence was “necessary” […]

WITNESS CREDIBILITY, DELAY AND DENTON.

There is an interesting discussion of  the credibility  of witnesses in the judgment of Mr Registrar Briggs in Preston -v- Green (Liquidator of Cre8atsea Limited) [2016] EWHC 25222 (Ch). The Registrar also had to consider whether to exercise his discretion under the Denton criteria when there had been a two year delay. The Registrar also […]

ANOTHER EXPERT WITNESS GOES AWRY: PATENTLY A PROBLEM

It is easy for the non-technical reader to pass over judgments relating to patents. These often involve highly technical issues.  However there is one aspect of the judgment in Thoratec Europe Limited -v- AIS GMBH Aachen Innovative Solutions [2016] EWHC 2637 (Pat) that may have a familiar ring.  It illustrates: The importance of case management […]

WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE: A MASTERLY EXPOSITION

The judgment of Master Matthews in Darby Properties Ltd -v- Lloyds Bank Plc [2016] 2494 (Ch) contains an important consideration of the rules relating to the admissibility of expert evidence. In particular when is expert evidence “necessary”? “… although I think there would undoubtedly be some assistance to the court in giving the court the […]

JUDICIAL ASSESSMENT OF EXPERT EVIDENCE: NOT SIMPLY A CASE OF WHICH EXPERT IS PREFERRED

There is a short passage in the judgment in Barclays Bank PLC -v- Christie Owen & Davies Limited [2016] EWHC 2351 (Ch) which considers the appropriate approach of the court when considering expert evidence. “To consider simply whether to prefer one expert over the other is not the correct approach. The Court should make a […]

AN EXPERT DISPLAYING ZEALOTRY IS NO HELP AT ALL (AND USUALLY HARMFUL)

In the Matter of F (a Minor)  EWHC 2149 (Fam)Mr Justice Hayden had to consider whether an expert report should be admitted in a family case.  The comments on the expert evidence are of general relevance. “The overall impression is of an expert who is overreaching his material, in the sense that whilst much of […]