Hajigeorgiou v Vasiliou

Hajigeorgiou v Vasiliou

Where a court order grants permission to rely on an expert by field and not by name, a party does not require further court permission to change experts within that field. If permission is required to substitute an expert, the court may condition such permission on disclosure of the first expert's report to prevent expert shopping, and this does not abrogate privilege but is a procedural requirement for fairness.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Nicos Varnavas Hajigeorgiou; Respondent/claimant: Vassos Michael Vasiliou
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Case Management Conference Directions Regarding Expert Evidence
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Legal Professional Privilege, Case Management, Expert Shopping
Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Legal Professional Privilege Case Management Expert Shopping

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nicos Varnavas Hajigeorgiou

Appellant/defendant

Vassos Michael Vasiliou

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Case Management Conference Directions Regarding Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant required court permission to change expert witnesses when the original order did not name the expert
  2. 2 Whether the court could condition permission to change experts on disclosure of the first expert's report, in light of legal professional privilege

Ratio Decidendi

Where a court order grants permission to rely on an expert by field and not by name, a party does not require further court permission to change experts within that field. If permission is required to substitute an expert, the court may condition such permission on disclosure of the first expert's report to prevent expert shopping, and this does not abrogate privilege but is a procedural requirement for fairness.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Order dated 2 December 2004 amended by deleting paragraph 4
  • Respondent/Claimant to pay costs of the appeal assessed at £10,310.63 inc VAT or subject to detailed assessment on the standard basis