header-logo header-logo

23 September 2010 / Mark Solon
Issue: 7434 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

A matter of protocol

Mark Solon taps into the world of experts’ discussions

The purpose of experts’ discussions is to narrow the issues between the experts, identify the extent of agreement and disagreement (and reasons for the latter), and if any action might be taken to further narrow the areas of disagreement.

There should be an agenda prepared between the parties, the solicitors and experts, which should be agreed in advance.

The agenda should indicate what matters have been agreed and summarise concisely those which are in issue. Arrangements for discussions should be proportionate—in small claims and fast track cases telephone discussions or an exchange of letters should suffice. Lawyers will only be present if all parties agree and, if they are present, it will only be to answer questions from the experts.

From the discussion, there should be a statement of the areas of agreement and disagreement, which should be copied to the parties and to the court. The summary should also indicate where progress might be made on those matters which cannot be agreed. The summary should be completed and signed by all the

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