Allen v Cornwall Council [2015] EWHC 1461 (QB) (20 May 2015)

Allen v Cornwall Council [2015] EWHC 1461 (QB) (20 May 2015)

The judge's decision to permit expert evidence was a legitimate exercise of case management discretion, addressing only the threshold issue of admissibility. The decision does not bind the trial judge, who may later reject the evidence if it is not relevant or helpful. The staged approach to expert evidence was sensible and did not prejudice the defendant.

Citation
[2015] EWHC 1461 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Philip Richard Edgar Allen (A protected party who proceeds by his wife Mrs Claire Allen, his litigation friend); Defendant: Cornwall Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal (and If Granted, Substantive Appeal) / Appeal Against Case Management Order Permitting Expert Evidence
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Case Management, Contributory Negligence, Highways Liability
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Expert Evidence Case Management Contributory Negligence Highways Liability

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Richard Edgar Allen (A protected party who proceeds by his wife Mrs Claire Allen, his litigation friend)

Claimant

Cornwall Council

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal (and If Granted, Substantive Appeal) / Appeal Against Case Management Order Permitting Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether expert evidence on cycling skills and safety is admissible and reasonably required to resolve proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in granting permission for expert evidence without first requiring production of the report
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in not granting permission for responsive expert evidence to the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's decision to permit expert evidence was a legitimate exercise of case management discretion, addressing only the threshold issue of admissibility. The decision does not bind the trial judge, who may later reject the evidence if it is not relevant or helpful. The staged approach to expert evidence was sensible and did not prejudice the defendant.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Costs of the application reserved to the trial judge.