Vilca & Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 1582 (QB) (30 June 2017)

Vilca & Ors v Xstrata Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 1582 (QB) (30 June 2017)

There is no sound basis for concern about expert shopping or abuse of process in this case, as the change of expert was due to ill-health and not for tactical reasons. The usual rationale for imposing a disclosure condition is absent, and the overriding objective is best served by not imposing the condition. The court should exercise its discretion in accordance with the overriding objective and the facts of the case.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1582 (QB)
Parties
Claimants: Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & ors; Defendant: Xstrata Limited; Defendant: Compania Minera Antapaccay S. A.
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury and Representative Action / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time and Conditional Disclosure of Expert Reports
Outcome
Application granted in part; extension of time to instruct a new expert allowed without condition of disclosure of prior expert reports.
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Extension of Time, Disclosure of Expert Reports, Expert Shopping, Case Management, Foreign Law
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Private International Law Expert Evidence Extension of Time Disclosure of Expert Reports Expert Shopping Case Management +1 more

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel Alfredo Condori Vilca & ors

Claimants

Xstrata Limited

Defendant

Compania Minera Antapaccay S. A.

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury and Representative Action / Interlocutory Application for Extension of Time and Conditional Disclosure of Expert Reports

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants should be permitted to instruct a new expert in Peruvian law and have an extension of time to serve expert evidence
  2. 2 Whether the court should require disclosure of reports or opinions from previously instructed experts as a condition for allowing a new expert

Ratio Decidendi

There is no sound basis for concern about expert shopping or abuse of process in this case, as the change of expert was due to ill-health and not for tactical reasons. The usual rationale for imposing a disclosure condition is absent, and the overriding objective is best served by not imposing the condition. The court should exercise its discretion in accordance with the overriding objective and the facts of the case.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part; extension of time to instruct a new expert allowed without condition of disclosure of prior expert reports.

Orders

  • Defendants permitted an extension of time to instruct and serve evidence from a new expert in Peruvian law.
  • No requirement imposed for disclosure of reports or opinions from previously instructed experts.