phoebe alexander

Issues with expert evidence can have a profound impact on the credibility of a party’s case, and consequently the likelihood or not of a party succeeding at trial. In this article we discuss some recent case law which highlights the need for parties to carefully comply with their procedural obligations regarding expert evidence, namely Part 35 of the CPR (“Part 35”) and the accompanying Practice Direction, to avoid such risks.

Issues with expert evidence can have a profound impact on the credibility of a party’s case, and consequently the likelihood or not of a party succeeding at trial. In this article we discuss some recent case law which highlights the need for parties to carefully comply with their procedural obligations regarding expert evidence, namely Part 35 of the CPR (“Part 35”) and the accompanying Practice Direction, to avoid such risks.

The Magomedov and others v TPG Group Holdings (SBS) LP and others litigation has been of great interest in the legal press over the last year and the recent decision of Mr Justice Jacobs should be of similar interest to fraud practitioners. The decision is interesting and covers a number of topics which we will be discussing in a 3-part series.