Digital evidence · court reporting, Maidenhead
An expert under CPR Part 35 has an obligation to provide assistance to the court and this obligation takes precedence over obligations owed to clients, solicitors and whoever settles the invoice. Therefore, if the report is drafted as advocacy with exhibits attached then it will likely fail to withstand a serious challenge. As such, CPR Part 35 is the basis upon which all other aspects of an expert's involvement are based.
Go through it with an engineer
0800 6890668
| Which report | When it applies | What's in it |
|---|---|---|
| Ordinary findings report | Any early advice, HR files or board-level decisions | A clear explanation of what was found, how that finding was reached, and what those findings mean in everyday language |
| Report for insurers and to support loss claims | When either cause, extent or liability is at issue | A report detailing the evidence supporting the findings, exhibits used during investigation and a separate section addressing the causality of events |
| CPR Part 35 report | Civil proceedings in England and Wales | The overriding duty is clearly stated; the instruction given to the expert witness is fully documented; the methods employed throughout the investigation are detailed and all declarations of truth and compliance with the CPR Part 35 rules have been signed |
| CrimPR Part 19 report | Criminal matters (criminal courts) | As above, in criminal form: qualifications & reliability material, with credibility declared |
| Single joint expert instruction | Court-directed instruction: a single expert serves both sides | A single report provided to all parties alike, with the court above both |
All instructions commence in confidence. First outline the incident, the devices and accounts involved in the incident and what the evidence needs to prove; this establishes the scope, and once established, it also sets the single written quote you will be provided prior to any examination commencing. The scoping discussion is free.
A summary of your letter of instruction will be recorded and included within the report itself. We document everything that may relate to our credibility (beginning with an independent laboratory that has no accreditation) prior to conducting the examination, rather than letting it surface later under cross-examination.
All steps are expected to be scrutinised line by line by an opposing expert, and therefore we perform them accordingly and write them down likewise, so that there will be no surprises when this occurs. Our conclusions do not bend towards the party who instructed us.
Form varies depending upon whether it is a civil or criminal action (CPR Part 35 / Criminal Procedure Rules Part 19), each with complete methodology & exhibits, a continuity record (no gaps) & two declarations. Conclusions precede the technical annex.
When all aspects of the case are handed over to another entity (report, exhibits, source files, hash values, continuity log and bench notes), a tribunal, or another expert who has been instructed against you, may replicate the work and obtain the same result(s).
Ask any expert before you engage them: since April 2019, criminal practice directions want whatever might diminish confidence in an expert's reliability to be outlined, with the absence of an accreditation expressly included. Failure to do so means that it will become the case's problem and not the expert's. Every report we produce opens with this disclosure.
Two companies had accounts that would not match up. There was also a folder missing between the two versions of their accounting files. Neither version had come through image capture untouched, and the timeline clearly demonstrated this. The case settled within a month.
A findings report answers the questions you wanted answered and explains how we came up with the answers. A court report includes additional items such as the overriding duty recorded, an instruction summary, methodology and continuity in full, a statement of truth, a declaration of compliance, and disclosure of anything that may be adverse to the expert.
Neither side, whatever the fee arrangement suggests. The duty to assist the court takes precedence over the obligation owed to the instructing party. This hierarchy is what makes the report valuable.
Yes. One report will be generated under a joint appointment. Both sides receive this identically worded report simultaneously, without either having seen the report before the other.
Because the rules call for it to be disclosed, it is disclosed at the beginning of the report. What the court ultimately evaluates is methodology because this is where the report's credibility lies. The over-statement of a report, and not lack of accreditation, is what leads to the breakdown of a report.
Recording in a loop is already overwriting your needed evidence, and the deadline will not move. There is no cost associated with opening a case today: diagnoses are free and remain completely confidential.