Rogue experts face “serious” consequences but reform unnecessary
Rules regulating expert witnesses do not need to be reformed despite the findings of a BBC Panorama investigation, a leading provider of training for experts has said.
Undercover Panorama reporters found four expert witnesses who appeared willing to help clients hide the truth, in a programme broadcast this week. Two of the experts later denied the programme’s allegations.
Mark Solon, managing director of expert witness training company Bond Solon, says he has only come across corrupt experts “in press reports”.
He added: “Every expert should know that their primary duty is to the court not the paying party—it is also their duty to tell the truth and to sign a declaration to that effect.
“However, the unenlightened self-interest of experts may be to look to their next set of instructions so there is pressure, perhaps unspoken, to give a response that is favourable to the client.”
Solon says the important point was that there are rules in place.
“Experts who don’t tell the truth risk committing perjury, which is a serious criminal offence,” he says.
“The case of Jones v Kaney [2011] UKSC 13 makes them liable in contract and they may be sued in negligence for an inadequate opinion. They may also be subject to disciplinary actions by professional bodies as well as a suit in damages by the opposing party.
“Solicitors should ensure that they do not use the expert as an adversarial tool but to assist in understanding a technical issue. They must not put pressure on the expert.
“There are serious consequences for not following the rules. The danger is that, where a solicitor frequently instructs the same expert in the same sort of matters, a system may be set up that tacitly encourages favourable opinions.”
