Search
Archive
Sign up to mailings
To keep up to date with our latest news and events, please sign up for mailings.
You are always free to unsubscribe at any time.
![Christopher Sharp QC](https://www.stjohnschambers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Christopher-Sharp-104-768x384.jpg)
Christopher Sharp QC discusses how a group of recent cases have revealed some worrying aspects of how experts, and their instructing lawyers, approach the exercise of preparing a joint statement pursuant to the Part 35 regime.
Although in at least one case (Mayr & Others v CMS Cameron McKenna Nabarro Olswang LLP [2018] EWHC 3669 (Comm)) there was a suspicion that the failure to conduct the exercise appropriately may have been deliberate, there is also (as in BDW Trading Ltd v Integral Geotechnique (Wales) Ltd [2018] EWHC 1915 (TCC)) an indication that experts may simply not fully appreciate their professional duties. In a third case (Saunders v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWHC 343 the judge was critical of a 60 page joint statement that did nothing to “agree and narrow” the issues. The experts/parties seemed to have lost sight of the purpose of the joint statement. Read more here.
This article will be a useful read to legal practitioners dealing with any civil litigation.
Download article: Part 35 and the experts’ joint statement