header-logo header-logo

26 April 2012 / Dr Chris Pamplin
Issue: 7511 / Categories: Features , Expert Witness , Profession
printer mail-detail

Relative values

Dr Chris Pamplin takes a hard look at the expert witness-specific recommendations from the Family Justice Review

The Family Justice Review Panel report (published in November 2011) contains several recommendations that are of particular significance for both expert witnesses practising in the family courts and those who instruct them. Announcing publication of the report, the Panel said that its recommendations were aimed at tackling “shocking delays in the system” and generally improving the family justice system.

Usefulness of expert evidence

The 155-page report devotes a little over nine pages to matters relating directly to expert witnesses. The section commences with a somewhat ambiguous statement as to the usefulness of expert evidence in child cases in the family courts. Acknowledging that expert evidence is “often necessary to a fair and complete process”, there has been a trend towards what the Review Panel believes is “unjustified use of expert witness reports, with consequent delay for children”.

It will be apparent, therefore, that this section of the report begins with a rebuttable presumption that there is an overuse of expert witnesses with a consequent increase

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