Jones v TUI – Portsmouth CC (First instance)

20/01/2020

Dates of case

17.01.2020

Although the case started life towards the bottom end of the Fast-Track, it was treated by both sides as a ‘test case’ on the admissibility of expert evidence in personal injury litigation. The Judge (DJ Ball) had the benefit of very detailed Skeleton Arguments from both sides and heard a full day of submissions, eventually handing down a reserved judgment at a subsequent hearing.

Although the case started life towards the bottom end of the Fast-Track, it was treated by both sides as a ‘test case’ on the admissibility of expert evidence in personal injury litigation. The Judge (DJ Ball) had the benefit of very detailed Skeleton Arguments from both sides and heard a full day of submissions, eventually handing down a reserved judgment at a subsequent hearing.

The matter concerned a holiday sickness claim where the Defendant had applied to Strike Out the Claimant’s medical evidence on the basis that his expert didn’t have the requisite expertise to opine upon the illness that he had suffered. A barrage of criticisms were levelled at the expert by the Defendant.

The Judge ultimately accepted the Claimant’s position that issues of the type that had been raised by the Defendant go to the weight that could be attached to the expert’s evidence, rather than it being a question of admissibility; the Defendant can properly deal with its criticisms of the expert’s methodology and expertise in submissions at the subsequent Trial. He found that the ‘expert’ could properly be considered to be such based upon his clinical experience and research. His evidence was admissible as it complied with the test set out by the Supreme Court in Kennedy v Cordia [2016] UKSC 6.