Expert Witness Journal Issue 66 April 2026 - Flipbook - Page 48
experts). The Court expressed its concern that “one
reason for the change of approach was that the
initial results were producing conclusions which
were unfavourable to the Claimants’ case”.
This article does not constitute legal advice, and you
should seek advice on the speci昀椀c circumstances of
your case. Please contact Matt Cordwent if you have
any queries
This highlights the need for experts to act
independently. If an expert changes their approach,
they must be able to explain why this was necessary.
About the author
Matt Cordwent
Matt is an Associate in Charles Russell Speechly
LLP’s Real Estate Disputes team and advises on a mix
of commercial and residential property disputes.
In contrast, the Court noted that Kronospan’s expert
had “explained in great detail in his report the
process which he and his team had undertaken.” The
data collected and analysed by Kronospan’s expert
was also more complete than that relied on by the
Claimants’ experts -having reviewed data collected
over three years as compared to nine months. This
impacted the weight the Court was willing to place
on the Claimants’ expert’s evidence, which it found
to be “too variable, unreliable and time-limited to
enable me to draw any clear conclusions”.
If you require an expert let us
do the searching for you
The signi昀椀cance of the locality principle
The Court considered whether Kronospan’s activities
exceeded the ‘ordinary use’ of the land in light of
the area’s character. Chirk is described as a mixed
residential and industrial town, with a population of
approximately 4,500 with three factories (including
Kronospan’s factory) operating in the area.
Call the Expert Witness free
telephone searchline on
0161 834 0017
Whilst the operations of the Kronospan factory
had expanded since it opened in 1971, the Court
held that this should be considered against the
timeframe in which the changes had occurred. A
Claimant must identify individual developments or
intense increases to activities within the relevant
period, especially where they cover a large period
of time as in the Kronospan case. “Gradual changes
or modest developments” which are “compatible
with the existing character of the locality” will not
su昀케ce, in the Court’s view.
Mr Shaun Moss
Expert evidence specifically to Housing Disrepair, Housing Conditions,
and Fire Safety and the enforcement of Tall Buildings. Providing expert
evidence in Civil Litigation, specifically related to Housing Disrepair and
Housing Condition disputes. Expertise covers the Landlord & Tenant
Act 1985 Sections 9a, 9b, 10, and 11 (LTA 1985 S9a, S9b, S10 & S11),
the Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, and the Health and
Safety Rating System (HHSRS).
Shaun Moss MCIEH is a member of the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health
and the Expert Witness Institute. He is Managing Director of Surrey Property
Licensing. Surrey Property Licensing provide high quality, expert advice and support
on any issues you may have surrounding PRS regulation.
Key takeaways
The Kronospan decision serves as an important
reminder of considerations a Claimant should make
before pursuing a nuisance claim. It is important
that they have su昀케cient evidence of the instances of
nuisance and the appointed expert is independent
and has the expertise and resources to produce a
robust, and objective, report. These types of claims
can be expensive and time consuming, meaning
careful analysis and thorough preparation of a
Claimant’s case to improve their chances of success
is particularly important.
He has over 19 years experience working for local authorities, including over 10 years
in private sector housing and enforcement.
His experience includes;
l Enforcement Actions
l Housing Disrepair or Housing Conditions
l HMO Compliance Inspections
l HHSRS Assessments
l Fire Risk Assessments
l Enforcement Action
Shaun has undertaken and achieved the Cardiff University Bond Solon (CUBS) Expert
Witness Civil Certificate and on the National Register of University Certificated Expert
Witnesses as well being members of the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health
(MCIEH) and the Expert Witness Institute (EWI).
Shaun has gained a reputation for developing positive working relationships with local
authorities, landlords, letting agents, housing associations, developers, tenants and
other organisations including Citizens Advice and Trading Standards.
Similar points apply for a Defendant defending a
nuisance claim, but it is also important to note that a
Defendant’s compliance with the relevant planning
and environmental requirements in connection
with their operations on land should be considered
as a minimum, especially where operating near to
residential land.
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
Contact: Surrey Property Licensing
01483 608 975
teams@surreypropertylicensing.co.uk
Web: www.surreypropertylicensing.co.uk/expert-witness
Address: 5 Brayford Square, London, E1 0SG
Tel:
Email:
46
APRIL 2026
