Marion Smith and Kate Grange
February 2012
A paper based on a workshop held at a meeting of the Society of Construction Law in Leeds on 15th September 2011
This paper considers a range of issues, all deriving from recent case law, about the position of experts as witnesses: expert immunity; legal professional privilege and experts? reports; selecting the right expert; the need for expert input before alleging professional negligence; what is objective unbiased opinion; dealing with joint experts; identifying what the judge wants; and hot-tubbing ? presently being piloted in the courts.
Introduction - What is expert evidence? - Expert immunity and Jones v Kaney (2011) - Legal professional privilege and experts' reports after Edwards-Tubb v Wetherspoon (2010) - Selecting the right expert: the guidance in BSkyB v HP Enterprise Services (2010) - The need for expert input before alleging negligence: Pantelli Associates v Corporate City Developments (2010) - Objective unbiased opinion: Stanley v Rawlinson (2011) - Dealing with joint experts after Thorpe v Fellowes (2011) - Expert evidence: what does the judge want? Compania Sud Americana de Vapores v Sinochem Tianjin Import and Export (2009) - The future: hot-tubbing.
The authors: Marion Smith and Kate Grange are both barristers and members of 39 Essex Street Chambers, London.
Text 25 pages.