Following an application before a DJ, the Claimant was ordered to disclose an advisory medical report as a condition precedent to permission to rely upon a Part 35 report. It was suggested the Claimant had engaged in expert shopping. HHJ Freedman, the DCJ of Newcastle-Upon-Tyne County Court, recognised that there is a fundamental difference between an advisory report and a Part 35 report. He rejected the allegation of expert shopping and expressed support for the contention that parties ought to be able to obtain a second opinion in private without being in fear of having to disclose that advice.
View Mr De Berry’s profile HERE.
Join our mailing list and receive advance notice of our events, seminars and trainings.
"*" indicates required fields