Professional Body Takes Action. Why professional memberships and regulation matter for experts.

Many experts are members of the professional bodies or associations relevant to their specialist field and will benefit from news, information, networking events and so on, as well as the ability to put the relevant letters after their name. Of course these are all helpful aspects of professional membership but from the point of view of the public and the courts a more important, possibly the most important, service a professional body provides  is to ensure that members provide professional and high quality services.

 

The key role of a professional body’s enforcement process in the justice system is illustrated by Lorimer-Wing v Hashmi. This case had, as the judge commented a fairly remarkable history  but in very brief summary the Defendant lost at a liability hearing and was ordered to purchase shares in a company at a price “to be determined”. There followed a series of applications, appeals and failures by the Defendant to pay costs or provide security for costs, all of which culminated in them being barred from taking any further part in the proceedings.

 

The quantum hearing duly took place with the judge relying heavily on a quantum report provided by a member of the ICAEW, resulting in a  valuation for the shares of £3.3 million. So not a good result for the (de-barred) Defendant. What follows is best explained by quoting the judge;

 

“On 10 December 2024 Mr Lorimer-Wing applied for permission to appeal the debarment order. This is the appeal. The application for permission to appeal was rejected on the papers by Leech J on 27 March 2025. Mr Lorimer-Wing applied to renew his application, and that came before Leech J on 20 June 2025. Just before that application was heard, the court received letters from Mr Ashing, the expert, and from a Mr Wiggins, a representative of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of England and Wales (“ICAEW”). The effect of those letters was that Mr Ashing accepted that his expert’s report which ICC Judge Agnello had relied on was flawed, and in particular he accepted that the correct value of the company at the material time was likely to be substantially less than set out in his opinion. Mr Wiggins explained that the ICAEW was involved because of a complaint made to it by Mr Lorimer-Wing against Mr Ashing. The investigation which was conducted by the ICAEW included instructing their own independent valuation, and that valuation expert was firmly of the view that the company had no value at the relevant valuation date. “

 

In other words  there was no basis for the award that had been made and the order for costs itself might also be unsafe. While couched in careful language the judge was clearly unhappy with the procedural mess that resulted, commenting that “These proceedings need to be brought to a conclusion by getting to the bottom of what happened in the Agnello proceedings, and I do not consider putting any more procedural impediments to a proper resolution on the merits of those issues is desirable. “ Accordingly, the Defendant was no longer de-barred would be allowed to bring in new evidence and amend their grounds of appeal.

 

While the next chapter in this particular saga may yet play out in court the key message is that professional bodies do matter and their complaints processes have teeth. If a party believes an expert has not acted appropriately for whatever reason there are avenues that can and should be used to challenge them.

 

Members of the Academy of Experts will be aware that while bodies such as ICAEW are often the first port of call for complaints, we also have a complaints process. The Academy’s code of conduct for experts  was approved by the Master of the Rolls and the disciplinary procedure is conducted, on the few occasions its required, by an independent committee led by a legal practitioner and comprising experienced experts and at least one dispute resolver. While most experts will never need to engage in the process it is an essential service to both the public and the courts. If you need advice on engaging an expert or identifying the appropriate body to contact for advice then please get in touch.

Contact Us