This guide is maintained as a current resource for August 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
Comprehensive guide to how joint expert evidence is prepared and assessed in clinical negligence cases in England and Wales. Explains Civil Procedure Rules Part 35, how single joint experts and expert discussions work, preparation of joint statements, expert duties, and how courts use expert evidence to narrow issues and assist decision‑making.
In clinical negligence cases and other complex civil litigation in England and Wales, expert evidence plays a central role. Where technical or specialist knowledge is required - for example on medical standards of care, causation of harm, or quantum of loss - evidence from independent experts assists the court in reaching a fair, informed decision. In recognition of the potential cost and complexity of expert evidence, the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) allow, and often encourage, parties to use joint expert evidence or to prepare joint expert statements setting out areas of agreement and disagreement between experts. This process is designed to narrow issues, reduce duplication and control costs while preserving high‑quality evidence.
This article explains how joint expert evidence is prepared and assessed, what legal rules apply, how expert discussions and joint statements are conducted, and how the court uses that evidence in clinical negligence disputes.
The Legal Framework for Expert Evidence
Civil Procedure Rules Part 35
Expert evidence in clinical negligence and other civil cases is governed by CPR Part 35, which establishes the legal rules on expert witnesses, their duties, and how evidence should be presented. Key provisions include:
- An expert's overriding duty to the court over any obligation to the instructing party.
- The requirement for expert evidence to be provided in written reports unless the court directs otherwise.
- The court's power to limit expert evidence and to order a single joint expert where appropriate.
- The court's power to direct discussions between experts and the preparation of a joint statement.
The accompanying Practice Direction 35 and judicial guidance on expert evidence add important detail on how joint expert work should be conducted and reported.
Why Joint Expert Evidence Is Used
Joint expert evidence is used in civil litigation to:
- Reduce duplication of expert work and costs when multiple experts would otherwise prepare separate reports on the same issue.
- Clarify issues in dispute by narrowing down points of agreement and disagreement.
- Assist the court in efficiently understanding complex technical matters without navigating multiple conflicting reports.
Under Part 35, the court may direct that evidence on a particular issue “is to be given by a single joint expert” where two or more parties wish to submit expert evidence on that issue. If the parties cannot agree on the expert, the court can decide who should be appointed.
Preparing for Joint Expert Evidence
Identifying the Need for a Joint Expert
A key consideration early in the litigation process is whether expert evidence is required at all. Under CPR 35.1, expert evidence should be restricted to what is reasonably necessary to resolve the proceedings.
Solicitors and parties will assess whether issues such as standard of care, causation, prognosis, or valuation of losses require specialist evaluation and whether it makes sense to use a joint expert or separate party‑appointed experts.
Court Direction and Agreements Between Parties
Before a joint expert can be appointed, the parties may:
- Agree by consent to instruct a joint expert - often on a specific issue such as causation or the adequacy of treatment standards.
- Request the court to direct joint expert evidence under CPR 35.7 if they cannot agree.
- Propose potential experts for the court's consideration if agreement cannot be reached.
Once a joint expert is appointed, each relevant party can give instructions to the expert. CPR 35.8 requires that any instructions issued by one party must be copied to the others, ensuring transparency.
Instructions and Court Orders
The court frequently sets a timetable for expert evidence, including deadlines for:
- Expert instructions.
- Preparation of the joint expert's written report.
- Dates for expert discussions and joint meetings.
The court may also control fees and expenses relating to expert work, particularly where a joint expert is instructed, and normally the instructing parties are jointly and severally liable for those fees unless the court orders otherwise.
Conducting Discussions Between Experts
Once separate expert reports have been produced (whether from party‑appointed experts or via a joint expert), the court may direct discussions between the experts under CPR 35.12. This is often referred to as a meeting of experts or an expert conference.
Purpose of Expert Discussions
- Identify and discuss expert issues in the proceedings.
- Seek areas of agreement on technical points.
- Clarify the reasons for any remaining disagreements.
The purpose is not to settle the legal case but to reduce the scope of contested expert evidence and make the core issues clearer for the court.
Logistics and Format
Expert discussions can be arranged in different formats:
- In‑person meetings.
- Telephone or video conferences.
- Written exchanges where meetings are impractical.
The agenda for such meetings is usually agreed by the parties' legal representatives before the meeting and sent to the experts so they can prepare effectively.
Parties - including solicitors - are generally not permitted to draft or negotiate the joint statement itself. The experts prepare it based on their discussions, preserving the independence required of expert evidence.
Preparing the Joint Statement
Following discussions, the experts prepare a joint statement setting out:
- Issues agreed between the experts.
- Issues not agreed and the reasons for disagreement.
- Any further issues or points that arose during the discussion.
- Notes on further action if appropriate.
The statement typically contains a declaration confirming that each expert understands and complies with their duty to the court under the CPR rules and relevant guidance.
The joint statement is usually signed by all participating experts as soon as practicable (normally within a week) and provided to the parties within a set period (often 14 days) after signature.
The Role of the Joint Statement in Court Proceedings
Once prepared, the joint statement assists in several ways:
- Narrowing down contested issues for trial or ADR.
- Helping the court focus on core technical disagreements without wading through multiple lengthy reports.
- Potentially promoting settlement where experts have agreed on key points.
Joint statements are often among the first documents judges review in evaluating technical evidence, so clarity and precision are important.
Even where a joint expert is used, the court may still allow written questions under CPR 35.6 to clarify expert reports, provided the questions are proportionate and for clarification only.
Practical and Procedural Considerations
Independent Duty
Experts, whether joint or party‑appointed, owe an overriding duty to the court, not to the party that instructed them. Their reports and joint statements must be independent and unbiased.
Costs and Proportionality
The court will consider proportionality when deciding whether expert evidence should be by a single joint expert, particularly in relation to the claim's value, complexity, and likely cost.
Timing
Discussions and joint statements typically occur after the exchange of individual expert reports and well before trial, allowing the court and parties to assess evidence and narrow issues in good time.
Key Takeaways
In clinical negligence (and broader civil) disputes in England and Wales, joint expert evidence and joint statements are structured processes under the Civil Procedure Rules that streamline expert testimony and make it more efficient for courts to assess complex technical issues. The preparatory stages involve obtaining court permission where needed, instructing experts with transparent shared instructions, and, where directed, holding expert discussions that culminate in a negotiated joint statement setting out agreements and disagreements. Joint evidence enhances clarity, reduces duplication, and focuses litigation on the key contested matters, assisting both parties and the court in resolving disputes effectively.
