Jones v Kaney

The Supreme Court held that expert witnesses should no longer enjoy immunity from suit for negligence in relation to their participation in legal proceedings, including the preparation of joint statements. The immunity is not justified by current public policy, and the risks of vexatious litigation or a chilling effect on expert evidence are not sufficient to deny clients a remedy for professional negligence. The duty to the court does not conflict with the duty to the client, and the analogy with advocates supports the removal of immunity.

Parties: Appellant: Jones; Respondent: Kaney
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 30 March 2011
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Expert Witness Immunity, Negligence, Duty of Care, Litigation Privilege

Tort Law Professional Negligence Civil Procedure Expert Witness Immunity Negligence Duty of Care Litigation Privilege

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 15 Party arguments 2

Parties

Jones

Appellant

Kaney

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether expert witnesses should retain immunity from suit for negligence in relation to their participation in legal proceedings, specifically in preparing joint statements for court use.

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

The immunity from suit for breach of duty that expert witnesses have enjoyed in relation to their participation in legal proceedings is abolished.
The case is remitted for further proceedings consistent with this judgment.