Expert Witness Journal Issue 67 June/July 2026 - Flipbook - Page 106
Expert Evidence in Family
Proceedings: Getting It Right
Where It Matters Most
by Mani Singh Basi, Barrister at 4PB & author of ‘A Practical Guide to Expert Evidence in
Proceedings Concerning Children’.
Those practising in the 昀椀eld of family law will be
well accustomed to the presence of expert evidence
in proceedings. In cases concerning children,
where decisions may have permanent and longterm consequences, such evidence often plays a
pivotal role. Its value, however, depends not simply
on its inclusion, but on how expert evidence is even
pursued in the fast place, and then considered and
ultimately understood.
beyond the expertise of the court and existing
professionals, and whether resolving it is essential to
determining the child’s welfare.
Applications that succeed tend to be those that
are tightly focused. They identify a clearly de昀椀ned
question, explain why expert input is indispensable,
and demonstrate that the proposed instruction is
proportionate. Vague or overly broad requests, by
contrast, are unlikely to assist the court and may
result in an application failing.
Di昀케culties frequently arise at each stage of this
process. Questions emerge as to whether expert
input is justi昀椀ed at all, how instructions should be
framed, whether the chosen expert is appropriately
quali昀椀ed, and how conclusions should be evaluated
or, where necessary, challenged.
Equally signi昀椀cant is the choice of expert. The
alignment between the issue in dispute and the
expert’s speci昀椀c area of knowledge is critical. An
opinion o昀昀ered outside an expert’s proper 昀椀eld,
or one that only partially addresses the relevant
question, is unlikely to carry substantial weight.
A de昀椀ning feature of expert evidence is the expert’s
overriding duty to the court. This obligation exists
irrespective of who has instructed or funded the
report. It is a principle that underpins the integrity
of the process and ensures that expert opinion is
directed towards assisting the court, rather than
advancing a particular case that a party is advancing.
All such considerations sit within the framework of
the Family Procedure Rules 2010, which govern both
the admissibility and conduct of expert evidence in
family proceedings.
Evaluating expert opinion:
a critical approach
Is it ‘necessary’: a disciplined exercise
While expert evidence can be highly relevant in
terms of the weight that a judge can attach to it in
proceedings, it is not determinative. Its persuasive
force depends on its quality. Courts are increasingly
attentive to shortcomings that may diminish
reliability, such as a weak evidential foundation,
failure to address competing explanations, or
reasoning that is di昀케cult to follow.
The rules impose a clear restriction: expert evidence
is only to be admitted where it is necessary. This
requirement, found in Part 25, is stringent. It re昀氀ects
a wider concern to avoid unnecessary delay and to
keep the court’s focus 昀椀rmly on the welfare issues
at stake.
For those involved in preparing and presenting cases,
early and careful evaluation is essential. Accepting
expert conclusions at face value can lead to 昀氀awed
decision-making, particularly in safeguarding
contexts. Equally, overlooking de昀椀ciencies may
result in important issues going insu昀케ciently tested.
In practical terms, this demands careful justi昀椀cation.
The decision to seek permission should follow a
structured analysis, not habit or convenience. Key
considerations include whether the issue truly lies
Challenging expert evidence, whether through
targeted questions or cross-examination, should be
understood in this light. It is not about discrediting
the expert, but about ensuring that their analysis
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
104
JUNE 2026
