Too many experts
Language: English Series: Times ; 25 January 1995, 38(1)Publication details: 1995Subject(s): Summary: "Rawlinson v Westbrook and another" CA 8 December 1994, following disputed entitlement to fees for an expert witness, "held" that the Rules of the Supreme Court should be revised to permit judges the right to refuse expert evidence, in order to protect litigants from unnecessary expense.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Law report | London Journal article | WB3104-21 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 75096-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: Journal article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
| No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | No cover image available | ||
| WB3102-38 Town and country planning costs | WB3102-40 Negligence | WB3102-41 Planning permission | WB3104-21 Too many experts | WB3104-31 Green belt | WB3104-36 Negligence: valuation | WB3104-38 Fixtures and fittings |
"Rawlinson v Westbrook and another" CA 8 December 1994, following disputed entitlement to fees for an expert witness, "held" that the Rules of the Supreme Court should be revised to permit judges the right to refuse expert evidence, in order to protect litigants from unnecessary expense.