The Lawyer’s new China Elite report contains the most detailed research available on the PRC legal market and contains unparalleled insight into the country's leading law firms. They vary in size, practice focus and geographic coverage, but they all share one common quality – ambition... 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.