Delivering Expert Evidence is Becoming Harder

Delivering effective Expert Evidence is becoming harder, at least in the UK, Australia and most likely other Commonwealth jurisdictions.  Traditionally the role of a Judge was to apply the law to the evidence presented by the parties to a dispute. In the case of expert evidence, this could include expert opinion, and where experts disagree, the Judge could choose one expert’s views over another, or combine the views. This approach seems to be changing with significant implications for the experts when preparing their reports and evidence.

It now seems acceptable in the UK and Australia that ‘the court is not compelled to choose only between the rival approaches and analyses of the experts. Ultimately it must be for the court to decide [what occurred] as a matter of fact… from a common-sense perspective’.

Our latest article: Delivering Expert Evidence is Becoming Harder discusses a number of recent judgements that seem to have re-framed the challenge of delivering effective expert evidence in the UK, Australia and potentially many other jurisdictions. Download the article from: https://mosaicprojects.com.au/PMKI-ITC-020.php#Process2