Chris Pamplin looks at the extent to which an expert witness’s evidence might be affected by
earlier exposure to information
Until recently, there was a somewhat dubious authority to suggest that experts were disqualified from acting in contentious cases where they had acted previously for, or had received privileged communications from, the other party.
In HRH Prince Jefri Bolkiah v KPMG [1998] EWCA Civ 1563, the analogy was drawn between expert witnesses and solicitors. It was pointed out that a solicitor who has acted for a party is prohibited from subsequently acting against that party on the grounds that he is privy to confidential information concerning that client. In Bolkiah, KPMG had provided forensic accountancy services in which they were given access to confidential information concerning the claimant’s assets. They had acted in an investigative role and had carried out much work which was similar in nature to that carried out by solicitors in preparation for proceedings. When the claimant became embroiled in unrelated proceedings, experts from KPMG were instructed for the other party. Counsel for Bolkiah, basing his submission on the decision of the
