Log in to your account
Search the Academy Website
High Court (Chancery Division)
[2026] EWHC 1182 (Ch)
Some specialist areas of expertise are so niche that it’s almost impossible to find experts who are free of previous involvement with one or more parties to a dispute. In a recent case requiring expert evidence in mine surveying (…
High Court (King’s Bench Division)
[2025] EWHC 3118 (KB)
No doubt at least some members will have received some shiny new tech gadgets in their Christmas stockings, but as you get to know the latest toys we start 2026 with a reminder to be aware of the possibility that…
High Court (Chancery Division)
[2025] EWHC 2757 (Ch)
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…
Court of Appeal
[2025] EWCA Civ 1397
Experts often have to rely on their clients and instructing solicitors to provide them with the material they need to form opinion. That evidence may be documents, data from an IT system or audio or video recordings and if the…
Commercial Court
[2025] EWHC 2364 (Comm)
The High Court ruling against Danish tax authority SKAT in a £1.4 billion dividend tax fraud case has been widely reported, not least because the judge concluded that SKAT’s controls on the transactions involved were so flimsy as to represent…
High Court (King’s Bench Division)
[2025] EWHC 1907 (KB)
Agreed expert evidence assisted the court in a clinical-negligence claim.
High Court (King’s Bench Division)
[2025] EWHC 2243 (KB)
Unexplained changes of opinion on Dutch law.
High Court (Chancery Division)
[2025] EWHC 2794 (Ch)
Most judicial criticism of experts arises from either ignorance of the basic rules of expert evidence or because experts who understand and have tried to apply the rules have slipped off the straight and narrow path, usually from a desire…
Commercial Court
[2025] EWHC 1586 (Comm)
The court questioned the scale of expert evidence on a narrow translation issue.
High Court (Chancery Division)
[2025] EWHC 1987 (Ch)
There has been some publicity about a recent case, JSC Privatbank v Kolomoisky , in which past judicial criticism of an expert were raised, suggesting among other things that experts have a duty to disclose such criticism. Less attention has…
Technology and Construction Court
[2025] EWHC 2429 (TCC)
Changes to agreed modelling assumptions required careful scrutiny.
High Court (Chancery Division)
[2023] EWHC 873 (Ch)
Academy commentary on Lidl v Tesco, discussed in “Evidence goes public. Why experts should take care to be consistent in their opinions.”.
