Rules for expert
witnesses Dear colleagues,
Whether you have been, are currently or maybe in the future, an ‘EXPERT’ I would like to draw your attention to UK Civil Rules & Practice Directions and Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) PART 35 – EXPERT AND ASSESSORS.
Please follow this link to see the full online information.
https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part35
As many maritime standard contracts refer to British Law, it is worth noting your obligations as a ‘Civil Expert’.
There are some minor variations on these if the case is heard in a UK Court or if it is Tribunal or an Arbitration, but the underlying advice to an ‘Expert’ remains the same.
In the past twelve months, I have read a number of cases where Expert Witness reports and or their testimony have been thrown out by the judges. The example below is for medical malpractice but I believe that the Judges findings can equally be related to a Maritime legal case Expert.
There is one case where the Judge found the claimant’s expert to be “a helpful, balanced and persuasive witness” who was “consistent in his approach and thoughtful under cross-examination”.
While in contrast, he (the Judge) could not say the same of the defendant’s expert, stating:
• He did not put a proper part 35 statement on his reports.
• He extracted one medical record adverse to the claimant’s case and elevated it out of all proportion in the joint report.
• He displayed no desire to understand the difference between the burden of proof on the balance of probabilities and the medical requirement in the publication of research for the conclusions to be to a scientific standard.
106 | ISSUE 106 | DEC 2023 | THE REPORT
Overall, he found the approach of the defendant’s expert to be “unusual” – particularly in “failing to set out the range of opinions in his report and therefore ignoring the clear duties laid upon experts when reporting objectively for the court, not for one party”.
So, I am highlighting some of the parts of PART 35 for your ease of reference:
Experts – overriding duty to the court 35.3
(1) It is the duty of experts to help the court on matters within their expertise.
(2) This duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom experts have received instructions or by whom they are paid.
Written questions to experts 35.6
(1) A party may put written questions about an expert’s report (which must be proportionate) to –
(a) an expert instructed by another party; or (b) a single joint expert appointed under rule 35.7.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144