Judicial review: what’s admissible?

Nicholas Dobson examines expert opinion evidence in judicial review proceedings

In judicial review proceedings, it is seldom necessary or appropriate to consider any evidence beyond the material before the decision-maker at the time of the decision and evidence of the process by which the decision was taken.

The Oxford English Dictionary tells us that an expert is a: ‘person regarded or consulted as an authority on account of special skill, training, or knowledge; a specialist’. However, former prime minister, Lord Salisbury (1830–1903) had a more jaundiced view: ‘You never should trust experts’, he wrote. For if: ‘you believe the doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe.’ There does, nevertheless, remain widespread public trust in expert opinion; much more so than in politicians. Relying on this, government ministers have often claimed to be ‘following the science’ on COVID.

But what of expert witnesses in court proceedings? Rule 35.2 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) states that a ‘reference to an “expert” in this Part is a reference to a person

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

Judicial review: what’s admissible?

Issue: 7958 / Categories: Features , Judicial review

Nicholas Dobson examines expert opinion evidence in judicial review proceedings

In judicial review proceedings, it is seldom necessary or appropriate to consider any evidence beyond the material before the decision-maker at the time of the decision and evidence of the process by which the decision was taken.

But what of expert witnesses in court proceedings? Rule 35.2 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) states that a ‘reference to an “expert” in this Part is a reference

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Gateley Legal—Jack Kelly

Gateley Legal expands Midlands residential development team

Gibson Dunn—Richard Surtees

Gibson Dunn adds employee benefits and executive compensation practice in London with partner Richard Surtees

Laytons ETL—Alec Cameron

Laytons ETL appoints new partner and head of intellectual property disputes

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Property cases reshape established principles

A series of recent decisions has clarified important principles across property law, from perpetuities to lease renewals and public rights over land

NLJ this week: Stress ruling raises the bar for employers

Employers cannot rely on wellbeing services alone to defend workplace stress claims after a High Court decision awarding almost £1m to an overworked employee

NLJ this week: Can Manchesterism revive access to justice?

Andy Burnham's brand of 'Manchesterism' could offer fresh thinking on legal aid and access to justice if it reaches Westminster, according to Roger Smith, NLJ columnist and former director of JUSTICE

NLJ this week: Constitutional conventions tested as power changes hands

The constitutional fallout from a change of prime minister, rather than the politics, is under scrutiny as questions arise over the limits of executive authority in a leadership transition

NLJ this week: Lawyers must become product designers

The legal profession is undergoing a fundamental shift from selling services to creating technology-enabled products, according to Professor Luke Mason, Head of School of Law at Regent's University London

Error message

Judicial review: what’s admissible?

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Jack Kelly

Gibson Dunn—Richard Surtees

Laytons ETL—Alec Cameron