At the risk of upsetting vegetarians or anyone who’s had a little too much turkey we thought we’d suggest you make use of the Christmas to New Year lull to think about freshening up your online presence by roasting it!

The advent of AI tools has generated a range of websites that will give you an automated review of your website a practice known as ’roasting’  – for example https://bugsmash.io/roast-my-website/, https://chatgpt.com/g/g-O3tctcceY-roast-my-website, https://unicornplatform.com/roast-my-website/ and many others. Many of the offer a level of ‘heat’ in the roast and we recommend dialling things down a little for your first attempt unless you have stratospheric levels of self-confidence. To set the scene The Academy’s roast in a  mild level concluded with “If at first, you don’t succeed, try removing all the overly serious content and injecting some charm instead!” – less complimentary roasts were available but we don’t plan to share them!

If you don’t fancy a roast it’s still worth trying to view your website, LinkedIn profile and Academy profile with an objective eye. Have you updated them recently, do your pictures reflect who you are now or a you from 20 years ago and do you set out your stall as an expert clearly and succinctly? If not maybe an update is in order.

Your Academy profile will be at https://academyofexperts.org/search-register/profile/firstname-lastname or just type your name and ‘Academy of Experts’ into Google to see how you look to the outside world. To change your profile login to https://academyofexperts.org and click on the Profile button. You can link the profile to your website to your LinkedIn profile

It’s also worth linking the other way so that your LinkedIn profile takes people to your Academy entry – there are two ways to do that, both accessed by editing the Intro section of your LinkedIn profile;

1. Add Academy membership as a new Current Position
2. Add Edit Contact Info to add a Website link to your Academy profile (https://academyofexperts.org/search-register/profile/firstname-lastname)

Remember, If you’re a lawyer looking for an expert you can search the Academy’s register for an accredited expert or contact us directly for assistance.

If you would like to join the Academy but are unsure if you have the appropriate skills please complete our Pre-Application Questionnaire and we will help you identify the appropriate membership level for you. Other benefits of membership include guidance and advice on being an expert, regular member meetings to discuss issues affecting experts and access to specialised PI insurance.

 

Our picture is from https://www.bbc.co.uk/food/recipes/perfect_roast_turkey_72482

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.

The Academy’s GDPR guidance turned 5 this year so we thought it was a good time to review it in the light of a better understanding of how GDPR has been implemented in practice. One of the challenges of developing guidance for our expert members is they cover a wide range of specialisms and as a result deal with widely differing types of personal information. The material needed by a medical or psychiatric expert to assess a personal injury is clearly very different from that used by an accountant to assess the value of a business.

In addition while some experts work within large consulting firms many are micro-businesses who don’t have the benefit of in-house egal advice but still have to negotiate the (sometimes onerous)  privacy responsibilities passed down to them by instructing solicitors.

 

Our guidance is designed to help members consider for themselves what aspects of their work are covered by GDPR in a structured way and is linked to a model privacy policy that can be used in a ‘pick and mix’ way to include only those sections that are relevant.  We recommend micro-business or individual expert read the ICO’s small business guide alongside our guidance and remind you that you are almost certainly required to register and pay the required annual fee.

 

The Academy  provides a range of practical advice and guidance on other topics such as conficts, Joint Statements, privilege and so on which is available at no charge to members in the Academy’s Knowledge Hub.

Members can also call our Technical Helpline for help and advice on ethical and practical issues from dealing with instructions to getting paid.

If you would like to join the Academy please complete our Pre-Application Questionnaire and we’ll help you identify the appropriate membership level for you. Other benefits of membership regular member meetings to discuss issues affecting experts and access to specialised PI insurance.

Many disputes involve insurers either as funders of a claim or defences but also as participants in their own right and most experts will have dealt with insurance companies at some point in their expert careers. There are also often disputes about the meaning of insurance cover which involve the use of experts with experience in insurance and how it applies to industries as diverse as shipping, personal injury  and  consumer goods.

As the professional society and accrediting body for expert witnesses of all disciplines the Academy of Experts is therefore delighted to announce a new relationship with FOIL, The Forum of Insurance Lawyers.  FOIL is the professional membership organisation representing those engaged in the defence of insurance-related claims. Its members act for insurers, self-insured companies and all authorities in the public and private sectors.

 

Experts can join FOIL as a Trade & Industry Partner to gain access to specialist information on the insurance industry and attend networking and educational events. Our relationship means Academy members receive a discount of 50% on FOIL membership.  Contact FOIL (https://www.foil.org.uk/contact-us/) quoting your Academy membership number to take advantage of this offer.

 

FOIL members can access many of  the Academy’s services such as ExpertSearch to find suitable experts and benefit from our detailed guidance on the use of experts. Contact the Academy for further information

 

Laurence Besemer FCII, CEO – FOIL said  “Nicola Cohen, CEO of The Academy of Experts, and I have been working for some time to agree on a Memorandum of Understanding between our organisations and I’m now very pleased to announce that terms have been agreed and an MoU signed.

FOIL and TAE both wish to promote the highest possible professional standards in their respective areas of work and the benefits of working in partnership in all appropriate areas and activities. I look forward to welcoming TAE members into FOIL as Trade and Industry Partners.”

Nicola commented ”The Academy of Experts is delighted to have signed an MoU with FOIL and is looking forward to working together. The new MoU recognises the importance of the insurance sector for expert witnesses.”

 

The Academy looks forward to working with FOIL  to maintain the high standards of professionalism the insurance industry expects.

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 been paid to the issues that led to the expert’s problems being aired in court.

The expert concerned was a fellow of ICAEW at the time of writing his reports but it transpired that by the time of the hearing he no longer was and more importantly his membership had been ‘Cessated’ and he had been the subject of a severe reprimand in relation to two disciplinary matters in 2023.  None of this information had been disclosed to the other side or to the court.

The judge made it clear that this was a very serious problem, “In my view, where an expert presents his evidence as a member of a professional organisation, which is expected by him to give the court assurance as to his ability to act in the case, he is under a duty to inform the court if his membership has ceased, more particularly where the cessation is linked to disciplinary proceedings against him.  The judges view was that the issue and the way the expert had dealt with it undermined the court’s confidence in his ability to give precedence to his overriding duty to the court when faced with other conflicting interests.

The existence of judicial criticism of the same expert from a case in 2018 was also relevant, and not disclosed, although the judge made no specific points about whether it should have been.

There’s a message here for both experts and their instructing solicitors.

For lawyers it is always worth checking an expert out by verifying their membership and searching for cases where they have been mentioned.  For experts, it really is important to maintain  your professional status and to make sure that if it changes for any reason you update your CV, online profiles and above all any lawyers you’re working with. You can be sure that an assiduous lawyer somewhere will check and even if you have decided to cancel a membership  for your own reasons its better to  say something immediately than find yourself being challenged in court!

 

The Academy is active in working with the judiciary and legal profession to ensure that expert views are taken into account and that members have access to the best possible advice and guidance.

Our Judicial Committee publishes the authoritative guidance for experts so you can be sure that you are adopting best practice. This includes for example the Model Form of Expert’s Report and Guidance Notes on Meetings of Experts, Contingency Fees & Remote Evidence.

We also provide practical advice and guidance on topics such as GDPR, Joint Statements, privilege and so on which is available at no charge to members in the Academy’s Knowledge Hub.

As a member you can also call our Technical Helpline for help and advice on ethical and practical issues from dealing with instructions to getting paid.

Ignoring AI for the moment, the use of computer models of various kinds has become routine in most if not all professions, whether it’s a simple spreadsheet or a sophisticated engineering in model. It should be no surprise then when such models  make an appearance alongside experts in disputes.

Some recent cases though point up the importance of the expertise that underlies any model and that an expert’s choice of inputs and their interpretation of the outputs is critical. Andrews v Kronospan is a case about dust, smells and other nuisance alleged to be caused by a factory. Experts in dust and wood fibre analysis met and agreed a set of parameters to be used in modelling the likely extend and impact of the factory’s activities, but both the Defendant’s experts for different reasons decide sometime later that these parameters were invalid. They came up with different parameters and different results, that favoured their client, although both provided detailed explanations and reasoning for their decision.

As the judge explained, neither expert has “been able to persuade me that their change of approach was not at least partially influenced by their desire to see whether or not their further analysis would benefit their clients’ case more than their existing analysis. I am not for one moment suggesting that they did not fully and properly discharge their duties as independent experts but I do consider that their evidence has to be considered with some caution as a result. Moreover, I am not satisfied on my analysis of the evidence that I can safely prefer their opinions based on their changed approach to those made by their opposite experts who proceeded on the basis of the initial common approach. “

In a completely different field, fingerprint analysis, there was no criticism of the inputs to an automated fingerprint comparison system. The difficulty was that one expert accepted the computer output as unequivocally correct, whereas the other, with the benefit of 30 years working on fingerprints was able to explain why some features of a fingerprint should be ignored because they typically appear when the print is smeared or of poor quality. Ultimately the judge preferred a manual approach illuminated by scientific knowledge and expertise over one that  treated the computer model as an infallible black box.

 

The message to experts is clear, you need to understand not just how to use a computer model, but what the right inputs are and how to interpret the outputs. Otherwise as the saying goes in the IT Industry you will have Garbage In and Garbage Out!

 

The Academy of Experts has a rigorous accreditation process to ensure that Practicing Members have appropriate professional skills and qualifications, have been trained in or have experience of  the role and process of being an expert witness and can provide appropriate references or evidence of their skills.

If you’re a lawyer looking for an expert you can search the Academy’s register for an accredited expert or contact us directly for assistance.

If you would like to join the Academy but are unsure if you have the appropriate skills please complete our Pre-Application Questionnaire and we will help you identify the appropriate membership level for you.  You don’t have to be already practising as an expert or have testified in court to join.

Other benefits of membership include guidance and advice on being an expert, regular member meetings to discuss issues affecting experts and access to specialised PI insurance.

While we still have London Legal Walk on 17^th June and  a session AI and Expert Evidence on 3rd July to look forward to those will be our last Member events until the autumn.

Over the last few years we’ve had talks about Public Enquiries, Civil procedure Rules, AI, Collaborative Contracts, Use of Statistics and many other topics of interest to experts. We’re already starting to plan our Autumn programme and would welcome ideas for events and speakers from members and the wider legal & expert community.

Is there a topic close to your heart you think experts should be more aware of – or can you bring a new slant to well worn subjects like expert independence, disclosure or any of the myriad challenges we all face in discharging our responsibilities to the courts? If you can please get in touch.

All our events provide the opportunity to learn from and be supported by other experts, something that many members find invaluable. They’re free to attend for members who can also bring a Guest.

Other benefits of membership include guidance and advice on being an expert, regular member meetings to discuss issues affecting experts and access to specialised PI insurance. If you’d like to join the Academy but are unsure if you have the appropriate skills please complete our Pre-Application Questionnaire and we’ll help you identify the appropriate membership level for you.

Spring is a good time for fresh starts so when better to check that your online profiles are looking good? As an experiment, why not just type your name and ‘Academy of Experts’ into Google to see how you look to the outside world. Ask  yourself ‘What would I think about this person if I was a solicitor looking to instruct a new, unknown expert?’  Is the profile up to date, does it contain the right qualifications and recent (not ancient) cases? Does the summary tell you instantly what sort of cases will be right for this expert? If the answer to any of those questions is “hmm, maybe”, then you have some work to do.

Alongside your Academy profile most people will also check a new expert on LinkedIn, so try the same exercise and search for yourself. Does your LinkedIn profile show that you’re an expert witness, does it include your Academy Membership and a link to your Academy profile to prove it? [Hint: it will be at https://academyofexperts.org/search-register/profile/firstname-lastname]. If you add Academy membership as an employment you’ll also be listed on the Academy page, so people will find you there if they start their search on LinkedIn

And finally, if you’re interested in acting in Arbitrations why not take up the complementary profile offered to Academy members by Jus Mundi. Just click to request a free trial and they will check you’re an Academy member and set it up for you.