Professional negligence claims and concurrent evidence in the courts
Without an admission of liability on the part of the defendant, a professional negligence claim requires the opinion of expert witnesses who can determine whether the standard of service met the standard of reasonable competency.
Over the years, the courts have done this by interviewing expert witnesses individually and hearing their testimony one-at-a-time. Although this has frequently been found a very effective method of gathering expert evidence to determine whether the defendant meets the reasonable person test, there have been problems.
For example, over the years it has been found by judges that both defendant and claimant professional negligence lawyers have a tendency to “lead” the witness in a particular direction and that, as a result, it can be difficult for courts to gain a clear and broad view of the expert opinion.
However, there is something called Concurrent evidence (also known as hot-tubbing) which was recommended by Lord Justice Jackson as part of his proposed reforms and has now become an option in the civil courts of England and Wales. Continue reading →