Litigators are generally happy with the increasing use of single joint experts (SJEs) - at least in smaller cases, a Law Society survey unveiled at the conference has revealed.

The survey of 180 solicitors by the civil litigation committee found that 44% regularly agreed with the solicitors for the other side to instruct an SJE, while 30% said the court often ordered their use.

Some 61% had no concerns with the increasing use of SJEs.

Presenting the results, committee member Colin Passmore, a partner at City firm Simmons & Simmons, said that while overall there was general satisfaction, 'usage tends to be limited to fast-track cases, personal injury cases and use on quantum issues'.

Some 90% of respondents found SJEs appointed more frequently in personal injury cases, while 57% said they were more likely to be appointed on quantum issues.

By contrast, they are rarely used in multi-track or complex litigation - Mr Passmore said he has never used one.

Mr Passmore said the appointment of an SJE 'often leads to settlement'.

While proceedings followed instruction of an SJE in 15% of cases, the figure rose to 46% when there was no such instruction.

Despite the efficiency of SJEs, and the convenience and ability to narrow the areas of dispute, Mr Passmore said there were concerns.

These included the SJE effectively usurping the role of the court and the parties because their view is accepted, and quality issues; 55% of respondents said they had suffered bad experiences or difficulties when using SJEs.

Neil Rose