PI Experts: Part 35, Permission and Evidence That Holds Up

Find A Course
PI Expert Evidence: Part 35, Single Joint Experts and Evidence That Holds Up

PI Expert Evidence: Part 35, Single Joint Experts and Evidence That Holds Up

Why expert evidence wins and loses personal injury cases: getting permission under Part 35, working with and around a single joint expert, the risk in

No of Students Enrolled ( 0 )

with Nicky Carter

Get Access to this course and +800 Courses For

99 / Month Per User

Training for 5+ people? See our package deals below for more info

169

See Brochure

Description

Expert evidence decides personal injury cases, and it rarely fails on the science. It fails on permission, on proportionality, on an assumption that was never a finding of fact, or on a concession the expert makes ten minutes into cross-examination. Nicky Carter works through where that happens and how to stop it.

The session starts with the Part 35 machinery: the burden on the party seeking to rely, the reasonably required test, and why no expert can be called without permission. It then covers the practical rules you actually reach for, including written questions under 35.6 and whether asking them tips off your opponent, the court's power to impose a single joint expert under 35.7, and what Daniels v Walker allows a dissatisfied party to do next.

From there it moves to the risk areas. Amending a report versus changing the expert, and the condition the court can impose requiring disclosure of the earlier unrelied-upon report. Where the line falls between a witness of fact giving opinion and an expert. Why accident reconstruction evidence keeps being over-read, with a run of decisions warning against precise findings on distance. And how surveillance footage, symptom validity testing and expert concessions now combine in fundamental dishonesty arguments.

Key Takeaways

- What reasonably required actually means on an application for permission, and why a few thousand pounds of additional damages will not carry a disproportionate expert
- How to use written questions under rule 35.6 without handing your opponent the weakness you had been saving for cross-examination
- Why a single joint expert report is the starting point rather than the end point, and the low bar in Daniels v Walker for getting your own expert
- Why amending a report is almost always safer than changing the expert, and how disclosure of the earlier report can be made a condition of permission
- Why experts' factual assumptions never become findings of fact, and the repeated warnings against precise reconstruction findings on distance and speed
- How surveillance evidence is treated even when the process was flawed, and what happens when experts revisit their opinion after seeing the footage

What you'll learn

1. Apply the Part 35 test for permission and proportionality when seeking or resisting expert evidence.
2. Use written questions, single joint experts and the Daniels v Walker route to get the evidence your client actually needs.
3. Handle an unhelpful report safely, distinguishing amendment from a change of expert and managing the disclosure risk.
4. Test reconstruction, surveillance and medical evidence for the assumptions and concessions that decide cases at trial.

Requirements

Watch the webinar and review any supporting documentation

Who is the target audience?

Personal injury solicitors, barristers, chartered legal executives, paralegals and litigation executives who instruct experts. Claims handlers and compensator side teams assessing expert evidence and running fundamental dishonesty arguments. Costs lawyers dealing with the costs of unrelied-upon reports. Medical expert witnesses and accident reconstruction experts who want to understand how their evidence is tested. Anyone looking for practical expert witness training rather than theory.

Course Content

Text

Recorded Webinar

01:09:00

Documentation

39 Pages

KeyWords

expert evidence, expert witness training, expert witness reports, expert report, medical expert witness, single joint expert, CPR Part 35, part 35 expert, part 35 questions, duties of an expert witness, expert shopping, accident reconstruction, surveillance evidence, fundamental dishonesty, personal injury course, personal injury training, legal cpd courses, law cpd, legal training

Instructor

Nicky Carter

780 Users
41 Courses
5 Reviews

Nicky has over 20 years experience as a claimant PI lawyer and works with a number of leading national firms and regularly presents courses for several of the country's largest providers of legal training. In addition she lectures on the BPTC and in the coming months will be lecturing on the CILEX level 3 and level 6 courses.

Reviews

No more reviews to load

Popular Categories

CPD Memberships

Premium Courses

2026 CPD Bundles

Candidate Links

Police Station

Magistrates Court Qualification

SRO Preparation

CQS Core Accreditation

CQS Reaccreditation

Legal Pathways

Conveyancing Pathways

Data Apprenticeships

Resources