REVIEWS
| Published date | 01 September 1992 |
| Date | 01 September 1992 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1992.tb02850.x |
REVIEWS
Tristram Hodgkinson,
Expert Evidence: Law and Practice,
London: Sweet
&
Maxwell,
1990,
lviii
+
447
pp, hb
f85.00.
David Carson,
Professionals and the Courts:
A
Handbook
for
Expert Witnesses,
Birmingham: Venture Press,
1990,
ix
+
69
pp, pb
f8.45.
The law relating to expert evidence has developed piecemeal, attended by both the
merits and the afflictions of the common law tradition. As the
use
of
expert
witnesses
becomes ever more prevalent, and their influence ever greater, the need
to
treat
the law of expert evidence as a body
of
(at least potentially) coherent rules and
principles has become more pressing, both as a matter of theoretical integrity and
everyday practice. Viewed against this background, Tristram Hodgkinson’s
commendable attempt to pull together the disparate strands of ‘expert evidence:
law and practice’ is to be welcomed as a timely contribution, filling a lacuna in
the English law literature already amply provided for in other common law
jurisdictions (see,
in
particular,
I.R.
Freckelton,
71te Trial
of
the Erperr,
Melbourne:
OUP,
1987).
Expert Evidence:
Law
and Practice
is essentially a practitioners’ manual; a how-
to-do handbook for solicitors and barristers who find themselves involved in cases
in
which experts are required to give evidence. The text is organised into six principal
sections, Parts A-F. A general introduction to the issues (Part A)
is
followed by
discussion of pre-trial (Part
B)
and then trial (Part
C)
practice and procedure. These
are perhaps the most comprehensive and valuable parts
of
the work, reflecting a
general bias towards practice over theory displayed throughout the book. Hodgkinson
presents the rules of procedure relating to expert witnesses, such as those directing
pre-trial disclosure, in a clear and concise manner, which is at once informative
and (bearing
in
mind the rather uninspiring subject-matter) eminently readable. His
discussion of the trial process, covering both statute and case law, and discussion
of all the major issues for debate (such as the admissibility of, and weight to be
accorded to, expert testimony,
in
the light of the hearsay
rules)
is
similarly impressive.
Critique of the existing position is incisive and underscored by practical hints and
suggestions, some of which penetrate
to
the very minutiae of practice. For instance,
in relation to pre-trial meetings between experts employed by the parties
to
prospective
litigation, Hodgkinson advises: ‘In major cases more than one meeting may prove
necessary. In those involving land or buildings a meeting on site may be a useful
focus for part of the discussion’ (p
99).
Discussion of the presentation of expert
evidence should be of interest to both practitioner and theorist: the former must
take note of subtle differences in emphasis and style in presenting expert testimony,
since these can influence admissibility, whilst the latter needs to consider how such
distinctions can be justified
in
principle
(if
at all). Hodgkinson’s practical hints will
undoubtedly be welcomed by the practitioner, although the academic may suspect
his general brevity in approach to belie omission and superficiality.
For Parts
D-F
Hodgkinson changes tack. Having isolated the underlying themes
and principles which identify expert evidence as a discrete subject area for investiga-
tion, he proceeds to illustrate these general points by reference to various spheres
of their practical manifestation. His exposition performs the dual function of providing
a starting point for those concerned with these individual subject areas, and of
contextualising and elaborating upon the material presented in the preceding general
sections A-C. In some ways, this is the most rewarding part of the text, since
it
754
To continue reading
Request your trial