Cases - Coopers Payen Ltd v Southampton Container Terminal Ltd

Record details

Name

Coopers Payen Ltd v Southampton Container Terminal Ltd

Date

[2003]

Citation

EWCA Civ 1223

Keywords

Expert witness

Summary

In an action for damages to a press which fell from a trailer at Southampton Container Terminal, the Court of Appeal considered the extent to which a judge would be entitled to depart from the evidence of a single expert.

The court accepted the authority of Lord Woolf's principles in Peet v Mid-Kent Health Care Trust but also counsel's submission that the case

'does not establish that the evidence of the expert must then be accepted by the court. The court must take its own view of the expert evidence in the light of all the other evidence'.

The Court of Appeal's view was that:

'All depends upon the circumstances of the particular case. For example, the joint expert may be the only witness on a particular topic, as for instance where the facts on which he expresses an opinion are agreed. In such circumstances it is difficult to envisage a case in which it would be appropriate to decide this case on the basis that the expert's opinion was wrong. More often, however, the expert's opinion will only be part of the evidence in the case ... at the end of the trial the duty of the court is to apply the burden of proof and to find the facts having regard to all the evidence in the case, which will or may include both evidence of fact and evidence of opinion which may interrelate.'

Further:

'Where a single expert gives evidence on an issue of fact on which no direct evidence is called, for example as to valuation, then subject to the need to evaluate his evidence in the light of his answers in cross-examination his evidence is likely to prove compelling. Only in exceptional circumstances may the judge depart from it and then for a good reason which he must fully explain.'

However, where an expert's evidence is on an issue of fact where it is challenged by direct evidence to the contrary, such as on the speed of a vehicle,

'There is no rule of law or practice in such a situation requiring the judge to favour or accept the evidence of the expert or the evidence of a witness of fact. The judge must consider whether he can reconcile the evidence of the expert witness with that of the witness of fact. If he cannot do so, he must consider whether there may be an explanation for the conflict of evidence or for a possible error by either witness, and in the light of all the circumstances make a considered choice which evidence to accept.'