The Lawyer Asia Pacific 150 is the only research report to provide a ranking of the top 100 independent local firms and top 50 global firms in the region. The report offers critical review of some of the fastest growing firms and their strategies, a country-by-country guide to leading legal advisers and legal services market trends, plus exclusive insight into the current business development opportunities in the Asia Pacific. Read more
This year, The Lawyer’s annual ranking of the largest UK law firms by turnover is available as an interactive, digital benchmarking tool. For the first time this will allow you to manipulate each data set against the metrics of your choice.
Your article 'How infallible is the expert's voice' (The Lawyer 12 March) brings to the fore a matter of serious concern, namely the lack of professional guidelines for those who offer their services as an expert although they have may not the expertise and/or independence to carry out the task to the high standard required.
So what ethical guidelines should experts set for themselves? I suggest that these should be:
1. To only accept an appointment if they consider that they have the necessary current expertise.
2. To confine participation in the case to that part for which the expertise is relevant.
3. To hold to their expert opinion regardless of the needs of the party hiring their services.
4. To give their opinion with clarity and brevity having beforehand thoroughly researched and thus confirmed its relevance to the case or parts thereof.
The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators trains professional persons to give expert evidence based on the above guidelines because it is well aware of the malpractice highlighted in this article.