Ryan v Resende [2018] EWHC 2145 (QB) (21 June 2018)

Expert evidence in care and occupational therapy is reasonably required at trial because existing experts cannot provide the necessary assessment of therapeutic need and cost. The refusal to permit such evidence was based on an incorrect assumption about the sufficiency of other experts' evidence. The appeal is allowed and the order varied to permit such expert evidence.

Citation: [2018] EWHC 2145 (QB)
Parties: Applicant: Ryan; Respondent: Resende
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 21 June 2018
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From a Costs and Case Management Conference Order
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Expert Evidence, Case Management, Appeals, Costs

Civil Procedure Personal Injury Expert Evidence Case Management Appeals Costs

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

Parties

Ryan

Applicant

Resende

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From a Costs and Case Management Conference Order

Legal Issues

1 Whether the Master erred in refusing permission to call expert evidence in care and occupational therapy
2 Whether further evidence not before the lower court should be admitted on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

Application to admit further evidence granted
Order of the Master varied to permit expert evidence in care and occupational therapy