Expert Witness Journal Issue 63 October 2025 - Flipbook - Page 12
case. The funding is agreed on the parameters
presented at the outset of the case. However, as the
case progresses, the experts receive documents in
a piecemeal manner which amount to the number
of documents to be a lot higher than previously
quoted for. The expert’s extra time taken in
reviewing the duplicate documents, requesting
missing documents, trying to obtain access to the
links provided is not considered. And any requests
from the experts for extra funding due to the
circumstances of the case are frowned upon. This
leaves the expert frustrated, disappointed and not
willing to partake in the process of providing expert
witness reports.
Similarly, court attendances can now be arranged
remotely. A number of courts have now moved from
in-person court attendances to remote attendances
because these tend to cost less, utilise less time for
the expert as the experts don’t need to travel which
means they don’t need to drop their full day from
their day-to-day jobs and are more e昀케cient. Despite
this, some instructing parties insist on an in-person
court attendance which some experts don’t want to
undertake.
4.Communication
E昀케cient and timely communication is a key aspect
of the relationship between the expert and the
instructing party. After receiving the CV and quotes,
the instructing parties sometimes takes months in
coming back to the experts to let them know whether
they would like to instruct them or not. This means
that the expert’s diaries are clogged up, they can’t
accept or decline other instructions and quite often
昀椀nd themselves in an awkward situation.
During the course of preparing an expert witness
report, the experts may have questions that they
need to ask the instructing party. Sometimes, a
response to these questions takes weeks and the
expert can’t progress with their report. However,
the expert is still expected to complete the report as
per the original agreed deadline.
2.Letter of Instruction (LOI)
The LOI is one of the most important document as
it needs to provide clear instructions to the expert
regarding the questions that need to be answered.
The experts base their report on the questions asked
within the LOI. However, it is not uncommon that
there are ambiguities found in the LOI, assumptions
made by the instructing parties which are not
mentioned in the LOI and assumptions made by the
expert based on the LOI.
On some occasions, the instructing parties do not
include all the questions within the LOI and criticise
the report for being incomplete. If the experts ask
for more funding to answer the new questions asked,
it’s not appreciated by the instructing party.
Conclusion
Experts are a valuable asset and the English justice
system rely heavily on them to provide their expert
opinions. Some simple measures can help reduce
the ine昀케ciencies and frustrations and improve the
experience of obtaining expert witness reports. An
e昀케cient document submission process where all the
relevant documents are sent to the experts altogether
in a timely manner, with correct nomenclature,
in correct format as well as with correct links and
passwords will make the process e昀케cient for the
experts. An e昀昀ective timely engagement between
solicitors and experts will help experts progress
cases e昀케ciently.
These situations lead to confusion, complaints and
mistrust in the whole process of providing and
obtaining expert witness reports. The instructing
parties challenge the opinion provided and
the experts defend the reports based on their
understanding of the LOI.
3.In-person assessment and court attendances
On a number of occasions, based on the particular
circumstances of a case, the experts are required to
assess the clients. And similarly, court attendances
are needed based on the requirements of the case.
Since the last few years, the frequency of remote
assessments and remote court attendances has
increased manifold. However, some instructing
parties insist on an in-person assessment as well
as in-person court attendance. Experts are best
placed to determine whether a remote assessment
is possible for any case or an in-person assessment
is required. However, the instructing parties insist
on in -person assessment despite an expert’s decision
that a remote assessment will su昀케ce. An in-person
assessment incurs more cost and more time spent on
travelling for the expert or the client, when it is not
necessary.
EXPERT WITNESS JOURNAL
In addition, detailed and clear instructions in an
LOI will help reduce risks of assumptions which
will massively help to obtain comprehensive expert
witness reports.
The above changes can help to streamline the
process and thereby increase the con昀椀dence of all
parties involved in obtaining and providing expert
witness reports.
10
OCTOBER/NOVEMBER 2025
