The claimant sought damages after a road traffic accident. The judge heard evidence from the claimant’s in person and from a conflicting expert’s report. He preferred the evidence of the claimants which he found to be blameless and honest. The defendant appealed.
Held: There was no rule requiring the court to accept an expert’s evidence over that of a lay witness. Our system is one of trial by judge, not by expert witness. The judge had been open and clear as to why he made his findings.
Judges:
Brooke VP CA, Arden, Longmore LJJ
Citations:
Times 19-Jan-2005, [2005] EWCA Civ 277, [2005] 1 WLR 2751
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Litigation Practice, Personal Injury, Road Traffic
Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.223680
