Original publication date not recorded.
The assessment of two geopolitical experts in the Nord Stream insurance litigation illustrates the importance of independent reasoning. One expert’s analysis was supported by research and verifiable material; the other was criticised for reasoning that appeared to advance the client’s case.
Experts may disagree, but independence must be apparent in their analysis and treatment of the available facts. The practical lesson for party-appointed experts is to demonstrate how the evidence supports their conclusions, consistently with their duty to assist the court.
Articles reflect the law and practice at the time of original publication, except where a dated update is shown. Subsequent developments may affect their relevance or accuracy. They are provided for general information and do not constitute legal or professional advice. Obtain appropriate advice on your particular circumstances. Full disclaimer.