Most reports never reach a courtroom. The ones that do are the ones that matter most, and an expert who has been cross-examined writes differently from one who has not. Below is my record, stated in numbers rather than adjectives.
The numbers
A record, not an adjective
The one confirmed figure here: 4–5 reports a month, current. Providing expert evidence since 2011, with over 300 reports produced to date.
Courts and tribunals in which I have given evidence: Coroner’s Court and Crown Court.
Training
Kept current, not adopted once
- Initial trainingReport writing training completed in 2012.
- Ongoing trainingOngoing refresher training undertaken regularly.
- Why it mattersThe requirements of Part 35 and the form of the expert’s declaration change, and an expert working from a template they adopted several years ago is a liability.
My duty to the court
Takes precedence over who is paying me
My overriding duty is to the court and it takes precedence over any obligation to the party instructing me or paying me. That is not a formality repeated at the end of a report; it governs how the report is written. In practice it means:
I will tell you when the case has no merit, on the merits call and before you have paid for a report.
I will state the range of opinion where one exists, including where the range includes a view contrary to my own, and I will give my reasons for taking the view I do within it.
I will say what I cannot determine on the material available, and what would be needed.
I will change my opinion if new material justifies it, and I will tell you in writing promptly when that happens rather than letting it emerge at a joint meeting.
I will not sign a joint statement that does not represent my view.
Joint statements and experts’ meetings
The purpose is to narrow the issues
My approach
I come to every meeting having re-read the papers and the other expert’s report in full — the purpose is to narrow the issues, not restate positions.
Where disagreement is genuine
I identify precisely what it rests on — usually a factual assumption, a reading of the records, or a difference on the standard of practice at the relevant date.
What a statement must do
Recording that two experts disagree, without saying what would resolve it, has not done the job the meeting was for.
Practical matters
Three more things worth knowing
Part 35 questions
Charged at the hourly rate See the fees page. Most Part 35 questions in practice are requests to address something asked in the letter of instruction and not covered, or to explain reasoning that was implicit rather than set out — both are caught by the published checklist.Single joint expert
Same terms, both parties I accept single joint expert instructions. Where instructed jointly I will correspond with both parties on the same terms, will not accept unilateral communication from either, and will decline to discuss the case with one party in the absence of the other.Availability for hearings
Early notice removes the only problem A consultant surgeon’s operating list is fixed a long way ahead. Tell me listing dates as early as you have them and I will block the diary; late notice is genuinely the only availability problem in this practice, and early notice removes it. Cancellation terms for vacated hearings are sent to you directly.Discuss a case
Fifteen minutes on the telephone, free of charge. I will tell you whether the issues fall within my expertise before anything is committed to paper.
Discuss a case