The recent case of Glover & Anor v Fluid Structural Engineers & Technical Designers Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1257 shows that lawyers are still making fundamental mistakes in their dealing with experts at the joint meeting stage.  

Similarly the judgment in Seneschall v Trisant Foods Ltd & Ors [2024] EWHC 1380 (Ch) shows that there are circumstances in which a court will allow a party to instruct their own expert if they disagree with the conclusions of a jointly instructed expert.

This webinar looks at the rules and case law in relation to the joint meeting of experts and the jointly instructed expert including:

• The purpose, rules and guidance in relation to joint meetings of experts
• What happens if the parties cannot agree an agenda
• What, if any, input can a lawyer have into a joint meeting?
• The consequences of “overlawyering” at the joint meeting stage
• What do you do if an expert changes their mind after a joint meeting?
• Attempts to “backtrack” from a joint report
• Expert misconduct at the joint meeting
• The consequences when an expert does not engage properly in the joint meeting process
• What can you do if you do not agree with the conclusions of a jointly instructed expert?