Edwards v Bruce & Hyslop (Brucast) Ltd

Edwards v Bruce & Hyslop (Brucast) Ltd

The judge's decision to allow the claimant to rely on its own expert was justified because secret communications between the defendant's solicitor and the joint expert tainted the expert's independence, making the usual single joint expert procedure untenable and requiring a departure from standard practice to ensure justice.

Parties
Appellant/defendant: Peter Morris Edwards; Respondent/claimant: Bruce & Hyslop (Brucast) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Permission to Appeal (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Single Joint Expert, Case Management Discretion, Costs Proportionality, Procedural Fairness
Civil Procedure Expert Evidence Single Joint Expert Case Management Discretion Costs Proportionality Procedural Fairness

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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Morris Edwards

Appellant/defendant

Bruce & Hyslop (Brucast) Ltd

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Permission to Appeal (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in permitting the claimant to rely on its own expert after previously ordering a single joint expert
  2. 2 Whether secret communications between one party and the joint expert tainted the expert's independence
  3. 3 Whether the order allowing a second expert was disproportionate given the sums at stake

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's decision to allow the claimant to rely on its own expert was justified because secret communications between the defendant's solicitor and the joint expert tainted the expert's independence, making the usual single joint expert procedure untenable and requiring a departure from standard practice to ensure justice.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused
  • Claimant permitted to rely on its own expert evidence as previously ordered