Expert e-wire
  Sign me up!  
  Have your say!  

Not logged in
  Log in now  

Join up!
Benefits for experts
Application form
Apply online

Benefits for lawyers

Did we help?
  Tell a friend   
  Contact us...   

Professional Indemnity Insurance for Expert Witnesses
Top quality
PI Insurance cover
at market-beating prices

Little Books
The Little Books
We have learnt the lessons from the mistakes of others, now you can learn them too!

Expert Witness
Year Book
The Expert Witness Year Book
Slip one in your bag, and you can be the expert with the facts at your fingertips!
  CPR Part 35 introduces 'hot tubbing'

Changes to the CPR Practice Direction accompanying Part 35 introduce measures proposed by Lord Justice Jackson to allow expert witnesses to give concurrent evidence

From 1 April 2013, the Practice Direction to Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) provides the power for the court to direct that expert witnesses from like disciplines can give their evidence concurrently. It also sets out the procedure to be followed once such a direction has been given.

The wording of section 11 of the Practice Direction is:

Concurrent expert evidence

11.1     At any stage in the proceedings the court may direct that some or all of the experts from like disciplines shall give their evidence concurrently. The following procedure shall then apply.

11.2     The court may direct that the parties agree an agenda for the taking of concurrent evidence, based upon the areas of disagreement identified in the experts’ joint statements made pursuant to rule 35.12.

11.3     At the appropriate time the relevant experts will each take the oath or affirm. Unless the court orders otherwise, the experts will then address the items on the agenda in the manner set out in paragraph 11.4.

11.4     In relation to each issue on the agenda, and subject to the judge’s discretion to modify the procedure:

(a)   The judge may initiate the discussion by asking the experts, in turn, for their views. Once an expert has expressed a view the judge may ask questions about it. At one or more appropriate stages when questioning a particular expert, the judge may invite the other expert to comment or to ask his own questions of the first expert.

(b)   After the process set out in (a) has been completed for all the experts, the parties’ representatives may ask questions of them. While such questioning may be designed to test the correctness of an expert’s view, or seek clarification of it, it should not cover ground which has been fully explored already. In general a full cross-examination or re-examination is neither necessary nor appropriate.

(c)   After the process set out in (b) has been completed, the judge may summarise the experts’ different positions on the issue and ask them to confirm or correct that summary.

For more information on hot tubbing see Your Witness 60, June 2010



Issue 76
March 2013

CPR Part 35 introduces cost estimates
CPR Part 35 introduces 'hot tubbing'
FPR Part 25 reworked

Current issue
June 2018

Is your spare room filling up?
Document retention policy
What is a reasonable time for document retention?
Conference news
Not logged in -  Log in now