Even if you require the assistance of an expert to enable you to formulate and assess the merits of your case, you may not be able to rely upon that expert’s evidence at trial, or if you are, you may not be able to recover the costs of instructing your expert from your opponent if you win. The Court has wide powers to limit expert evidence in order to reduce the costs incurred in a case and shorten the length of the trial.

In some cases the Court will expect the parties to give joint instructions to a single expert. The Judge will have power to appoint a single expert if the parties have failed to do so and to exclude the parties’ own expert evidence unless the use of separate experts can be justified. Since an expert’s overriding duty is to the Court and not to the party instructing him, there may be little disadvantage in instructing a joint expert if both parties are happy with the choice of expert.

Experts must summarise the substance of all instructions given to them by a party, both oral and written, in their reports. Communications between experts and one party may, if referred to by the expert in their evidence and in certain cases be disclosed to the other party. This means that a party can no longer have a confidential discussion about his case with his expert. Experts may also seek directions directly from the Judge, making clear their role as independent advisers to the Court.