header-logo header-logo

04 July 2014 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7613 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

Game over?

profession_pamplin

Are experts now able to tackle the ultimate issue, asks Chris Pamplin

Following FIFA’s finding that Luis Suarez bit Italian defender Giorgio Chiellini in the final match of Group D in the World Cup in Brazil, Uruguay said they would appeal, calling it an “excessive decision” for which “there was not enough evidence”. Suarez has been involved in a number of professional disciplinary hearings before, and his December 2011 hearing before the Football Association Regulatory Commission set out the approach to be followed when considering evidence in such matters—and perhaps surprisingly, footballers’ antics on the pitch serve to illustrate the current state of practice when experts are called to opine on the central issue in a case.

It had long been a rule of evidence at common law that a witness should not give evidence in relation to the “ultimate issue” in a case, because that is a matter for the court to decide and should not be usurped. For some time, however, there has been a steady weakening of the rule against expert opinion on the ultimate issue. The 1972 Civil Evidence

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll