header-logo header-logo

25 October 2007 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7294 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness
printer mail-detail

Limiting the evidence

What is the expert’s role in gathering and presenting evidence? Chris Pamplin reports

Limiting the amount and scope of expert evidence has long been one of the functions of the case management procedures of the civil courts. The time and expense involved in the provision of expert evidence means that the courts must have regard to the proportionality of any request. Indeed, the court should refuse permission where reasons for the request are viewed as frivolous.

However, given that the need for additional evidence is sometimes critical to the court’s ability to make an informed decision, and that the expert evidence itself is often of a highly technical nature, two questions arise:
- How should the courts deal with such requests?
- How much influence should the experts or the parties have upon the court’s decision?

If an expert feels that there is insufficient evidence before the court to prove or disprove a case, does the expert have discretion to request that further tests be carried out? If so, what is the expert’s role in that evidence-gathering process? These were questions considered recently by the Family

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