Arden v Malcom

Arden v Malcom

Permission to adduce Professor Strauss's statistical report is refused; statistical evidence should first be raised through questions or directions to existing clinician experts, and only if disagreement arises should a statistician's evidence be considered.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Jennifer Arden; Defendant/appellant: Anthony Malcom
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Appeal From Case Management Decision
Outcome
Application to rely on Professor Strauss's report refused; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Life Expectancy, Case Management, Quantification of Damages
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Expert Evidence Life Expectancy Case Management Quantification of Damages

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jennifer Arden

Claimant/respondent

Anthony Malcom

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Appeal From Case Management Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Defendant may rely on a statistical report on life expectancy in a personal injury action
  2. 2 Appropriate procedure for adducing statistical evidence in quantification of damages

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to adduce Professor Strauss's statistical report is refused; statistical evidence should first be raised through questions or directions to existing clinician experts, and only if disagreement arises should a statistician's evidence be considered.

Court Disposition

Application to rely on Professor Strauss's report refused; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Counsel invited to agree a form of order relating to questions and directions to be given to Dr Hardie and Professor Trimble.