Expert Witness Journal Issue 67 June/July 2026 - Flipbook - Page 94
Navigating claims and managing
experts: traditional professions
verses emerging professions
by Anne-Marie Knight, Partner & Bronagh Irvine, Principal Associate at Weightmans.
The insurance landscape is continuing to change
and with it, the types of professionals seeking
professional indemnity insurance is shifting and
growing. The sector has, for decades, insured and
responded to claims against what are regarded as
“traditional risks”, such as surveyors, architects,
engineers, solicitors and accountants. However,
professional indemnity insurance is increasingly
being sought by what are commonly referred to as
‘emerging professions’ and they are challenging
the status quo when it comes to litigation risks. One
aspect to consider in managing and responding
to such claims is the key issue of identifying and
managing expert witnesses.
professionals often operate in a less regulated arena
or one where standards are developing and are not
well established by reference to case law. The absence
of established standards via case law may assist the
policyholder in defending the claim, as it is for the
claimant to establish breach of duty. However, when
claims are brought, this creates a number of hurdles
for their insurers and legal professionals alike,
including assessing the risk with the assistance of an
appropriate expert witness experienced in opining
on such claims. Additionally, the fact that statutory
and regulatory frameworks are still developing,
means that legal professionals are often advising on
a framework that is unclear and capable of changing.
This in turn adds to the complexity of expert witness
input.
The shift
Investigating and responding to claims against
“traditional” professionals such as accountants,
solicitors and architects, comes with the bene昀椀t of
well-established statute, a developed body of case
law and regulatory frameworks. The challenge in
each professional indemnity claim of establishing
compliance with the standard of reasonable skill and
care to be expected of each professional is assisted
by the availability of a multitude of experienced,
tried and tested liability expert witnesses. Generally
speaking, therefore, the standards to which these
“traditional” professions are to be held is often
relatively clear based on expert input. The strategy
that is deployed to defend these claims has been
honed year after year, claim after claim. Insurers,
their “traditional” insured customers and the legal
professionals representing them therefore bene昀椀t
from a relatively high level of certainty as to the
likely trajectory of any given claim and the level of
risk/cost that is set to be incurred in defending it.
Scarcity of expert witnesses
In emerging 昀椀elds/professions, the pool of potential
expert witnesses is often small leading to two speci昀椀c
challenges.
Con昀氀icting out
The few available experts are often con昀氀icted out
early by other parties. This is particularly so where
there is a multi-party dispute or an insured client is
joined to proceedings late in the day. The corollary
of this is that the insured client can be “on the
backfoot” due to the most reputable experts already
having been retained by the other parties.
Increased input from the legal team
It is often the case that experts in these emerging
professions are very experienced practitioners in
their own 昀椀eld but have little experience of litigation
procedure, the preparation of expert reports that
comply with the Civil Procedure Rules, meetings
with their counterparts to narrow the issues and
cross examination at trial. If this is not correctly
managed, it can lead to expert reports which can
At Weightmans, we have been instructed in relation
to claims made against a wide range of “emerging”
professionals, such as archaeologists, interior
designers, heritage consultants, process servers,
letting agents and planning consultants. These
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
92
JUNE 2026
