Expert witness instructed on personal injuries claim - defendants dissatisfied with report and applying to substitute different expert - defendants required to disclose first expert's report

Beck v Ministry of Defence: CA (Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, Lords Justice Simon Brown and Ward): 11 June 2003

The claimant developed a mental illness while serving as an RAF officer.

He brought an action for damages for psychiatric clinical negligence, alleging that as a result of the negligence of the RAF's medical staff, his illness had become chronic.

The claimant was examined by a psychiatric expert for the defendants with whose report the defendants were dissatisfied.

On their application to substitute their psychiatric expert, the judge ordered, among other things, that the action be stayed until the claimant had undergone a medical examination by a second expert for the defendants.

The claimant appealed, contending, among other things, that the defendants should be ordered to disclose the first expert's report.

Howard Elgot (instructed by Stamp Jackson and Procter, Hull) for the claimant; Philippa Whipple (instructed by the Treasury Solicitor) for the defendants.

Held, allowing the appeal, that, where a judge had decided to allow a new expert to be instructed by the defendants to examine the claimant in a personal injuries claim, the disclosure of the original report by the first expert should be a condition of the defendants being allowed to instruct a new expert, in order to avoid 'expert-shopping' and to ensure that the claimant was not left wondering whether the first report had been discarded because it was favourable to him.