Highlights from the EWI Technology and Practice Survey 2026 Highlights from the EWI Technology and Practice Survey 2026

Highlights from the EWI Technology and Practice Survey 2026

A survey by the Expert Witness Institute, supported by Fortythree Tech
A Day in the Life of a Clinical Psychologist Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Clinical Psychologist Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Clinical Psychologist Expert Witness

Jane Duff is a Consultant Clinical Psychologist, Head of the National Spinal Injuries Centre Psychology Service, and an Expert Witness. Here, she...
A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Veterinary Expert Witness

Veterinary surgeon, Jeremy Stattersfield, has been guiding courts on veterinary medicine since 1981. He told us how he got into the Expert...
Amr Danyall Marshal & Ors v Awais Javed & Ors [2025] EWHC 3195 (Ch) Amr Danyall Marshal & Ors v Awais Javed & Ors [2025] EWHC 3195 (Ch)

Amr Danyall Marshal & Ors v Awais Javed & Ors [2025] EWHC 3195 (Ch)

The judge found that the report by the claimants’ forensic accounting expert was not expert evidence because it simply reported what the...
Review of 2025 Review of 2025

Review of 2025

EWI Chief Executive Officer, Simon Berney-Edwards, shares his thoughts on 2025, a year where Expert Witnesses have continued to come under increasing...
Celikdemir v PGR Timber Limited & Anor [2025] EWHC 3118 (KB) Celikdemir v PGR Timber Limited & Anor [2025] EWHC 3118 (KB)

Celikdemir v PGR Timber Limited & Anor [2025] EWHC 3118 (KB)

The Claimant, on her solicitor’s advice, covertly recorded her testing by the Defendant’s neuropsychological expert. Weighing up the...
A deficient capacity assessment A deficient capacity assessment

A deficient capacity assessment

The task for the expert in this case was enormous. Capacity is issue specific. This means that if the issue is someone’s capacity to conduct...
The Isolation of Experts The Isolation of Experts

The Isolation of Experts

In this article, Dr Kay Linnell OBE talks about the role of the expert witness, and the problems that can be encountered when Instructing Parties go...
Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025 Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025

Podcast Episode 20: Review of 2025

Join us for the last podcast of 2025! With some festive cheer, we review 2025, with the ten key issues for expert witnesses that we've seen over...
A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of an Orthopaedic Spinal Expert Witness

Mr Niall Craig is a Consultant Orthopaedic Spinal Surgeon and Expert Witness specialising in complex spinal cases. He tells us about his professional...
Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice

Podcast Episode 19: Transparency and Open Justice

In this month's episode of the Expert Matters Podcast, we explore recent developments in Transparency and Open Justice. You can also catch our...
Podcast Episode 18: Pro Bono Expert Evidence Podcast Episode 18: Pro Bono Expert Evidence

Podcast Episode 18: Pro Bono Expert Evidence

Today is the start of the 24th UK Pro Bono Week. In this extra edition of the Expert Matters Podcast we discuss the EWI's recent Partnership with...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Jennings v Otis Ltd [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB)
Wiebke Morgan 2356

Jennings v Otis Ltd [2023] EWHC 2039 (KB)

byWiebke Morgan

The case: the Appellant, an experienced lift engineer employed by the first Respondent, suffered the traumatic amputation of his arm when it became entangled in lift drive machinery which he was inspecting at the Second Defendant's premises. It is the Appellant's case that the drive machinery was inadequately guarded and the accident occurred when he stumbled or lost his balance and his arm bypassed what guarding was present and went into the moving parts. It is the case on behalf of the Respondents that the Appellant's version of events is implausible and the accident occurred because the Appellant deliberately chose to put his arm through a gap in the guarding in order to undertake some work on the machinery.

To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. 

Already a member? Login

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.