Cases - Baldev Singh Mann v Chetty & Patel
Record details
- Name
- Baldev Singh Mann v Chetty & Patel
- Date
- (2000)
- Citation
- EWCA Civ 267
- Legislation
- Keywords
- Expert witness
- Summary
-
Following a matrimonial dispute, the appellant had sued his solicitors for professional negligence. The judge refused permission to use expert evidence to:
- value the matrimonial home;
- value a business which he had been a partner in; and
- to assess allegedly forged handwriting.
The Court of Appeal considered the entitlement to call expert evidence:
'Expert evidence is to be restricted to that which is reasonably required to resolve the proceedings (rule 35.1). No party may call expert evidence without the court's permission (rule 35.4(1)). The court may direct that evidence be given by a single joint expert instructed by the parties (rule 35.7) or appoint an assessor to assist the court (rule 35.15).
Clearly, therefore the court has to make a judgment on at least three matters: (a) how cogent the proposed expert evidence will be; (b) how helpful it will be in resolving any of the issues in the case; and (c) how much it will cost and the relationship of that cost to the sums at stake.'
The court upheld the decision to refuse expert evidence for the valuation of the matrimonial home and for handwriting, but allowed expert evidence to be given about the value and profitability of the business.