Hubbard & Ors v Lambeth Southwark & Lewisham Health Authority & Ors [2001] EWCA Civ 1455 (7 September 2001)
The court's discretion under CPR 35.12 to order meetings of experts should generally be exercised to facilitate narrowing of issues, even in complex clinical negligence cases, unless very good reasons are shown to the contrary. Sensitivity or professional relationships among experts, or the complexity of issues, do not constitute sufficient reasons to refuse such an order. The presence of lawyers at such meetings is not required unless justified by the circumstances; recording the meeting provides adequate safeguards.
- Citation
- [2001] EWCA Civ 1455
- Parties
- Claimant/appellant: Krister Jane Hubbard (By Janet Hubbard - Litigation friend); Claimant/appellant: James Michael Hubbard (By Janet Hubbard - Litigation friend); Claimant/appellant: Anne Louise Read; Defendant/respondent: Lambeth Southwark & Lewisham Health Authority; Defendant/respondent: West Kent Health Authority; Defendant/respondent: Bexley & Greenwich Health Authority
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 07 September 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Order of Master Ungley in Queen's Bench Division
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Expert Evidence, Case Management, Meetings of Experts, Discretion Under CPR 35.12, Presence of Lawyers at Expert Meetings
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Krister Jane Hubbard (By Janet Hubbard - Litigation friend)
Claimant/appellant
James Michael Hubbard (By Janet Hubbard - Litigation friend)
Claimant/appellant
Anne Louise Read
Claimant/appellant
Lambeth Southwark & Lewisham Health Authority
Defendant/respondent
West Kent Health Authority
Defendant/respondent
Bexley & Greenwich Health Authority
Defendant/respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From Order of Master Ungley in Queen's Bench Division
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the court should order meetings of experts in clinical negligence cases where not all parties agree
- 2 Whether lawyers should be present at such meetings
- 3 Whether Article 6 ECHR is engaged by such orders
Ratio Decidendi
The court's discretion under CPR 35.12 to order meetings of experts should generally be exercised to facilitate narrowing of issues, even in complex clinical negligence cases, unless very good reasons are shown to the contrary. Sensitivity or professional relationships among experts, or the complexity of issues, do not constitute sufficient reasons to refuse such an order. The presence of lawyers at such meetings is not required unless justified by the circumstances; recording the meeting provides adequate safeguards.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Order of Master Ungley affirmed: meetings of experts to proceed as ordered, without lawyers present unless otherwise agreed; meetings to be tape recorded; no order as to costs
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment