‘A High Court judge has upheld a decision not to allow a claimant in a noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) case to rely on a different expert because a joint expert produced an unfavourable report.’
Litigation Futures, 15th September
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Hussein and Another (Status of passports: foreign law) [2020] UKUT 250 (IAC): CMG Ockelton VP has explained that (i) a person who holds a genuine passport, apparently issued to him, and not falsified or altered, has to be regarded as a national of the State that issued the passport, (ii) the burden of proving the contrary lies on the claimant in an asylum case, and (iii) foreign law (including nationality law) is a matter of evidence, to be proved by expert evidence directed specifically to the point in issue. The appellant Mr Hussein, who had permission to appeal, and the applicant Mr Abdulrasool, who was seeking permission to appeal, were father and son who made asylum claims, which were refused. The applicant, who was born in 2000, additionally claimed that he was so dependent on his parents that it would be disproportionate to remove him from the UK. Mr Hussein’s wife and two minor children were included in the appellant’s claim as his dependents. Both men gave their oral evidence in a hearing before FTTJ McAll in January 2020 as did Mr Hussein’s brother. The SSHD was not present and FTTJ McAll considered Mr Hussein’s claimed history in detail. He decided that he was untruthful and concluded that he had fabricated important parts of his account supporting his asylum claim. He decided that Mr Hussein was a national of Tanzania and could be returned there. He disbelieved the asylum claim and concluded that there was no good article 8 reason why he should not leave the UK and return to his country of nationality. Both appeals were dismissed.’
EIN Blog, 7th September 2020
Source: www.ein.org.uk
‘A panel of top judges has issued guidance for expert witnesses on giving evidence remotely, which warns that “processing information through online contact is hard”.’
Litigation Futures, 3rd September 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Ceon Broughton, a rapper jailed over the death of his partner Louella Fletcher-Michie from a drug overdose at Bestival has won his appeal against his manslaughter conviction. Broughton’s conviction in 2019 and seven-year prison sentence for manslaughter was quashed on 18 August 2020 by the Court of Appeal. The appeal was heard before The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales Lord Burnett, Mr Justice Sweeney and Mr Justice Murray.’
Garden Court Chambers, 18th August 2020
Source: www.gardencourtchambers.co.uk
‘It is not the role of the courts to subject “uncontroverted” expert reports to “the same kind of analysis and critique as if it was evaluating a controverted or contested report”, the High Court has ruled.’
Litigation Futures, 25th August 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘The rapper Ceon Broughton has had his conviction for the manslaughter of his girlfriend overturned by the court of appeal.’
The Guardian, 18th August 2020
Source: www.theguardian.com
‘A High Court judge has urged parties not to expect to be given sympathy in future if they continue to flout procedural rules and file evidence late.’
Law Society's Gazette, 21st July 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The medico-legal and insurance services (MLIS) market had an estimated turnover of £700m last year but the coronavirus will have a “major impact”, a report has warned.’
Litigation Futures, 16th July 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Dewinder Birk of No5’s Family Group has set out two cases dealing with two different aspects of experts’ costs in private children cases, but both of which highlight the robustness of the higher courts in exercising discretion in relation to costs when dealing with such matters.’
No. 5 Chambers, 1st July 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘In R (Dunn) v The Foreign Secretary and the Chief Constable of Northamptonshire [2020] EWHC 1620 (Admin) the Divisional Court dismissed two applications made in anticipation of the forthcoming rolled up judicial review arising out of the death of Harry Dunn.’
UK Human Rights Blog, 6th July 2020
Source: ukhumanrightsblog.com
‘At 28, the Claimant had acquired a traumatic brain injury and been rendered tetraplegic in an accident caused by the negligent driving of the Defendant. The case came before Master Eastman in July 2019 for case management. At that stage, it was common ground between the experts in neurology for each party that the Claimant’s injuries had significantly reduced his life expectancy. However, they disagreed as to the extent of the reduction, Dr Liu for the Claimant estimating that his life expectancy to be 30-35% of normal; Professor Collin for the Defendant adopting a figure of 30-44% of normal. There were also differences in the experts’ approach to available statistics. Whilst the range of figures adopted by each expert were not far apart and it was likely that the Claimant’s care costs would by awarded by way of a PPO, it was nonetheless accepted that the difference between the parties translated to a 7-figure sum. At the CMC before Master Eastman in July 2019, the Defendant’s application for permission to rely on a report, from medical statisticians on the issue of the Claimant’s life expectancy, was dismissed on the basis that neither party’s neurology expert deferred to evidence from a statistician to assist them in determining the Claimant’s life-expectancy and such evidence would not add to their existing analysis of the available statistics. The Defendant did not appeal.’
No. 5 Chambers, 22nd June 2020
Source: www.no5.com
‘Civil claims increasingly raise technical and scientific issues that require evidence from experts who can assist the court in understanding the key issues. However, the parties do not have a right to adduce expert evidence and the court’s permission will be required. Rather, the court will control the use of evidence. It will do this by restricting the use of expert evidence to that which is reasonably required to resolve the proceedings (CPR 35.1).’
Law Society's Gazette, 22nd June 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘The High Court has refused an insurer permission to rely on a new expert whose evidence reduced the estimated life expectancy of a personal injury claimant.’
Law Society's Gazette, 17th June 2020
Source: www.lawgazette.co.uk
‘A High Court judge has overturned relief from sanctions granted to a claimant in a medical negligence case, partly because of her solicitor’s “egregious” conduct.’
Litigation Futures, 15th June 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Liz Andrews, barrister at 1|GC Family Law reviews the judgment in A Local Authority v The Mother and others where Williams J was required to determine, in light of the guidance of the President of the Family Division alongside the recent decisions concerning adjournments during the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, whether a fact-finding hearing taking place within long-running care proceedings was to continue following the conclusion of expert evidence and, if so, in what form, or whether the hearing should be adjourned to allow the lay parties to give evidence in person.’
1 GC: Family Law, 5th June 2020
Source: 1gc.com
‘The High Court has rejected an application for relief from sanctions from a claimant who went “well beyond” the terms of a directions order by obtaining a fully updated report from a medical expert.’
Litigation Futures, 2nd June 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
‘Three senior judges have rejected a posthumous appeal against the conviction of Gordon Park, the so-called “Lady in the Lake” killer.’
BBC News, 1st May 2020
Source: www.bbc.co.uk
‘The Court of Appeal is to rule on Thursday on the power of the Master of the Rolls (MR) to make an emergency practice direction in response to Covid-19.’
Litigation Futures, 29th April 2020
Source: www.litigationfutures.com
© Inner Temple Library 2025