In an age of growing demand for expedient and high-risk cosmetic procedures, we may see an influx of negligence claims soon, if not already. Where
When two experts present evidence, courts may choose to rely on the stronger report. In some instances, however, courts may appoint their own expert witness.
It is a growing trend for letters of instruction to be dated to be contemporaneous with the completion of an expert witness report. In this case, comments were made suggesting that this practice should be avoided.
This case is a timely reminder of the impact that a thorough expert, who explores and considers all avenues of relevant information, can have on a case.
This case is a pertinent reminder of the impact expert evidence can have on a matter, and the difficulty of refuting expert evidence without the assistance of an expert witness to offer an opposing view.
What are the common mistakes that can make a report less effective and, at worst, inadmissible in court? This article examines some typical issues that arise when lawyers engage experts, and how to avoid them.
If an expert is asked a ‘wrong’ question, expensive expert comment may have been enlisted that the court will never hear.
This case is a pertinent reminder that lawyers and experts alike should ensure that joint expert reports align with the provisions of the court in which evidence is being given, or else risk expert evidence being rendered inadmissible.
When engaging an expert witness, it is of paramount importance that a correct match is made regarding the contentious issue in litigation and the speciality of the expert witness engaged to provide opinion.
In the event that an expert is required to give evidence in court, it is important to be aware of an expert witness’s responsibilities for court attendance.
One ongoing areas of discussion in legal reform is that of unconscious bias in expert witness evidence and how it may be avoided. We discuss the main issues and describe how it can be minimised or avoided.
This case marks the first time that the High Court has considered the Native Title Act in determining monetary compensation, with this ruling setting a precedent for future native title compensation claims.
When experts are briefed with assumptions that contradict their own findings. It is common for lawyers to brief an expert in a letter of instruction
Introduction Bicknell v Pickard [1] centered around to what extent the plaintiff’s psychiatric illnesses were caused by a motorcycle collision between the plaintiff and the defendant,
Background: In order to deal with a feral cat problem, a Melbourne council issued a notice that citizens would be paid for capturing feral cats
The High Court has rejected granting special leave to Samsung Bioepis (‘SB’) to challenge the decision of the Full Federal Court in Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals
Phi Finney McDonald will exclusively run the class action against GetSwift, after the two other competing class actions were permanently stayed, as Lee J “was
singapore
Level 42, Six Battery Road
Singapore 049909
©2023 - ExpertsDirect
Made with love by Studio 21
