BPTC Law Notes BPTC Civil Ligitation Notes
A collection of the best BPTC notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through dozens of samples from outstanding students with the highest results in England and carefully evaluating each on accuracy, formatting, logical structure, spelling/grammar, conciseness and "wow-factor".
In short, these are what we believe to be the strongest set of BPTC notes available in the UK this year. This collection of BPTC notes is fully updated for recent exams, ...
The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our BPTC Civil Ligitation Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:
NON-EXPERT OPINION EVIDENCE
opinion = conveyance of facts personally perceived
can give evidence on matters where impossible to separate inferences from perceived facts based on
admissibility - no strict rules:
following admissible:
e.g. ID: people, voices, objects, handwriting, speed, temperature, weather, passing of time, drugs
description of condition of objects
description of value of commonplace objects
opinion on: age, health, bodily / emotional state, reaction to event / circumstances, whether drunk
EXPERT OPINION EVIDENCE
ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT EVIDENCE
general rules
artistic, scientific, technical issues
must be decided on basis of expert evidence
in absence of expert evidence, issue must be decided against party with burden of proof
requirements for admissibility
matter must call for expertise
i.e. NOT within in experience of most members of public
matters of credibility, motive for judge NOT expert
RTA reconstruction experts: NOT permitted to analyse WSs to deduce when motorists should've seen each other, what evasive action should've taken, whether any drivers should be criticised for expert (matters for judge)
expert as factual witness: if gives evidence of primary facts within own knowledge, but often asked for professional opinion
area must be established field of expertise
usually obvious
if NOT party seeking to call must satisfy court
witness must have suitable qualifications and / or experience
experience (without qualifications) can be enough e.g. mechanic
evidence of expert with qualifications (but without experience) carries little weight
permission must be obtained from court
assumed facts
expert CAN express opinion directly on issues in case (CEA 1972 s3 - partly abolished ultimate issue rule)
part of ultimate issue rule still in tact: should NOT attempt to make findings of fact + should express opinion on basis of assumed fact (ID'd in report)
CONTROL OF EVIDENCE
court's power to control evidence + exclude otherwise admissible evidence (r32.1) particularly relevant for experts, as often expensive + time consuming
GENERAL PROVISIONS
interpretation / definitions
expert = person instructed to give / prepare expert evidence for purpose of proceedings (r35.2(1))
experts' duty to court
the essence
duty to court overrides obligation to those instructing / paying them (r35.3)
duty = to help court by providing objective, unbiased opinions matters within their expertise (r35.3, PD 35 para 2.2)
other considerations
assist court in fulfilling OO (protocol para 4.2)
expert evidence should be and be seen to be (Whitehouse v Jordan) independent product of expert uninfluenced by pressures of litigation (PD 35 para 2.1)
experts should consider all material facts including those adverse to their opinions (PD 35 para 2.3)
expert must give evidence honestly, even if involves concessions contrary to client's interest (Jones v Kaney)
if issue falls outside expertise / unable to reach definite opinion, expert should make it clear (PD 35 para 2.4)
if expert's view changes on material issue after producing report, should communicate change to all parties without delay + court when appropriate (PD 35 para 2.5)
if expert adopts biased / irrational approach
after giving expert time to make representations, may refer conduct to professional body (Pearce)
choice of expert in light of duties
employee of party - can be called as expert witness if qualified + understands duty to court (Field v Leeds CC)
expert evidence on own behalf - held to be entitled (psychologist gave re: why conduct not below standard of care - DN v Greenwich LBC)
PRE-TRIAL STEPS
expert evidence only admissible with permission
DON'T need court's permission to instruct expert
BUT need court's permission to call expert / put in expert report (r35.4(1))
in deciding whether to grant permission, court:
seeks to restrict expert evidence to that reasonably required to resolve proceedings (r35.1) i.e. restrict oral evidence + number of experts (PD35 para 1); +
considers if costs proportionate to benefits, especially of multiple experts (r1.4(2)(h))
application process
the application (r35.4(2))
provide estimate of costs of proposed expert evidence
ID:
field evidence required in;
issues expert will address; +
(where practicable) name of proposed expert
the order / directions granting permission (r35.4(3))
will limit expert evidence
shall only be in relation to named expert / field ID'd in application
may specify issues expert should address
small claims and fast track: if given, permission usually for evidence from one expert on a particular issue (r35.4(3A))
wrong to call more than 1 expert in field without very good reasons (JP Morgan Chase)
will specify whether expert evidence will be adduced by reference to reports / orally
small claims and fast track: court will NOT direct expert to attend hearing unless necessary in interests of justice (r35.5(2))
multi-track: oral evidence = last resort (Daniels)
if directions affect / require act to be done by expert party instructing must serve copy on expert (PD 35 para 8)
fees / costs (r35.4(4)
court may limit what is recoverable from other side
appointment of experts
before instruct, establish:
have appropriate expertise + experience
familiar with expert's duties
can produce report, deal with questions + have discussions within reasonable time and at proportionate cost
description of work sought
whether can attend trial
no potential conflict of interest
at outset, agree terms of appointment e.g. time for delivery of report, basis of charges, compliance with CPR
letter of instruction
provision
those instructing should give clear instructions:
basic info (names etc.); nature + extent of expertise required; purpose of advice; key issues; SoCs; what needs to be investigated; documents forming part of standard disclosure, outline programme + deadlines for each stage of...
Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our BPTC Civil Ligitation Notes.
A collection of the best BPTC notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through dozens of samples from outstanding students with the highest results in England and carefully evaluating each on accuracy, formatting, logical structure, spelling/grammar, conciseness and "wow-factor".
In short, these are what we believe to be the strongest set of BPTC notes available in the UK this year. This collection of BPTC notes is fully updated for recent exams, ...
Ask questions 🙋 Get answers 📔 It's simple 👁️👄👁️
Our AI is educated by the highest scoring students across all subjects and schools. Join hundreds of your peers today.
Get Started