PI Practitioner – each issue a particular topic is highlighted, citing some of the useful cases and other materials in that area

A judge had been entitled to refuse to admit expert medical evidence on the grounds that it was served very shortly before trial and that it was not useful.

Boyle v Commissioner of Police of the MetropolisВ [2013] EWCA Civ 1477

The appellant (A) appealed against the dismissal of his personal injury claim arising out of a road traffic accident in which he was struck by a police car. The judge found that a safe speed would have been 28 mph and that C was in breach of duty for travelling at 33 to 35 mph.

A had not served any expert medical evidence on the issue of liability until the working day before the trial. The judge refused to admit the evidence on the basis of lateness and because it did not assist. A therefore failed to show that the driver’s breach of duty was causative of his serious injuries.

The Court of Appeal (CoA) held that there had been prolonged and persistent failure to serve the evidence. The judge had considered the relevant provisions of CPR Part 35 and the factors in CPR r.3.9 and it could not be said that he was wrong in deciding not to admit the report. The judge was also correct to hold that there was no point in serving the report if it did not assist.

January 4, 2014 В· Editorial Team В· Comments Closed
Posted in: News