Allison v. Orr [2004] ScotCS 5 (08 January 2004)

Allison v. Orr [2004] ScotCS 5 (08 January 2004)

The necessity for instructing an expert witness must be assessed at the time of instruction, not by reference to the eventual settlement or its amount. It was not necessary to instruct an employment consultant to establish loss of employability or promotion prospects, as the court could determine these issues without such expertise. However, it was necessary to instruct an actuary to quantify potential pension loss if the court accepted the pursuer's evidence on loss of promotion prospects, as actuarial calculation is complex and often requires expert input.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 5
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Lisa Margaret Allison; Defender and Respondent: Sir John Orr
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) in Civil Damages Action / Appeal Against Refusal to Certify Expert Witnesses
Outcome
Reclaiming motion allowed in part; interlocutor refusing certification recalled in part; Dr. Grant not certified; Mr. Carlisle certified as skilled witness; no expenses due to or by either party for the motion roll hearing; expenses of reclaiming motion reserved.
Legal Topics
Certification of Expert Witnesses, Necessity of Expert Evidence, Loss of Employability, Loss of Promotion Prospects, Loss of Pension Rights, Assessment of Damages
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Costs Certification of Expert Witnesses Necessity of Expert Evidence Loss of Employability Loss of Promotion Prospects Loss of Pension Rights +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lisa Margaret Allison

Pursuer and Reclaimer

Sir John Orr

Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) in Civil Damages Action / Appeal Against Refusal to Certify Expert Witnesses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was necessary to certify an employment consultant and an actuary as skilled witnesses under rule 42.13(2) for the pursuer in a personal injury action.
  2. 2 Whether the necessity for expert instruction should be assessed at the time of instruction or in light of the eventual settlement.

Ratio Decidendi

The necessity for instructing an expert witness must be assessed at the time of instruction, not by reference to the eventual settlement or its amount. It was not necessary to instruct an employment consultant to establish loss of employability or promotion prospects, as the court could determine these issues without such expertise. However, it was necessary to instruct an actuary to quantify potential pension loss if the court accepted the pursuer's evidence on loss of promotion prospects, as actuarial calculation is complex and often requires expert input.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion allowed in part; interlocutor refusing certification recalled in part; Dr. Grant not certified; Mr. Carlisle certified as skilled witness; no expenses due to or by either party for the motion roll hearing; expenses of reclaiming motion reserved.

Orders

  • Recall interlocutor of 30 July 2003 insofar as it refused certification of Dr. Grant and Mr. Carlisle.
  • Refuse to certify Dr. Grant as skilled witness under rule 42.13(2).