Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
(Computer-Aided Transcript of the Stenograph Notes of Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited 190 Fleet Street, London EC4A 2AG Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838 Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR SIMON WHEATLEY (instructed by Edwards Geldard ) appeared on behalf of the Appellant MR ANDREW HOCKTON (instructed by Eversheds) appeared on behalf of the Respondent ____________________
While Lord Woolf's report does not of course have the force of a statute, it provides a useful reminder that it will only be in a really exceptional case that more than one expert in any particular speciality will be permitted.
This passage is not of course concerned with the issue with which we are concerned on this appeal, but in the example it gives it shows an awareness of the existence of problems peculiar to litigation of this type.
(1) the general rule must be as envisaged by Master Ungley, namely that in the vast majority of cases there should be no more than one expert in any one speciality, but -
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.