Jackson v Marley Davenport Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 1225 (09 September 2004)

Jackson v Marley Davenport Ltd [2004] EWCA Civ 1225 (09 September 2004)

Earlier drafts or reports by an expert, prepared for the purpose of litigation and not intended to be relied upon at trial, remain privileged and are not subject to disclosure under the Civil Procedure Rules. Only the final report intended for use at trial must be disclosed, along with the substance of material instructions.

Citation
[2004] EWCA Civ 1225
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Alan Jackson; Defendant/appellant: Marley Davenport Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Litigation Privilege, Disclosure of Expert Reports, Civil Procedure Rules (cpr)

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan Jackson

Claimant/respondent

Marley Davenport Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From County Court to Court of Appeal

  1. 1 Whether an earlier, privileged expert report must be disclosed if a later report is served for trial
  2. 2 Whether CPR 35.13 or general case management powers require disclosure of earlier expert reports
  3. 3 Scope of litigation privilege in relation to expert reports

Ratio Decidendi

Earlier drafts or reports by an expert, prepared for the purpose of litigation and not intended to be relied upon at trial, remain privileged and are not subject to disclosure under the Civil Procedure Rules. Only the final report intended for use at trial must be disclosed, along with the substance of material instructions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs of the appeal to be assessed in accordance with the Appellant's public funding certificate.