Substituting an existing expert witness for a new expert
In Hort v Charles Trent Ltd  EWHC 3966 (QB), the High Court held that a party to litigation is permitted to substitute their expert witness for another where the opposing party does not suffer delay, additional expense or prejudice as a result and the courts should only exercise their discretion to refuse permission in exceptional circumstances.
The claimant (Hort) had relied on an existing expert witness, Dr Dick, since 2010 and had disclosed the expert’s report to the respondent (Trent). Hort had lost confidence with the existing expert and asked for the court’s permission to rely on a different expert report from a neurologist, Dr Sawle, which had also been disclosed to Trent.
At the case management conference, District Judge Hallett refused permission for Hort to rely on the new expert witness report, placing considerable reliance on his duty to control expert evidence in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) Part 35. Hort appealed the decision…
If you are registered and logged in to the site, click on the link below to read the rest of the Allen & Overy briefing. If not, please register or sign in with your details below.
News from Allen & Overy
News from The Lawyer
Briefings from Allen & Overy
The ITC has reaffirmed its power to ban electronic transmissions from the US where those transmissions infringe an intellectual property right or are otherwise based on an unfair trade practice.
A new French law, the ‘Law to recapture the real economy’ (‘Loi visant à reconquérir l’économie réelle’ or ‘Loi Florange’), was made on 1 April 2014.
Analysis from The Lawyer
Imagine you’re the general counsel of London-based private equity investor BC Partners. You’re sipping on your coffee, hashing out the details of your imminent £382m investment into UK-based business publishing company Mergermarket.
‘Exotic’ investors and opportunities for legal work beyond M&A feature in The Lawyer’s high-level roundtable debate on south-east Europe