| 000 | 01136cam a2200265 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | X125256 | ||
| 008 | 040301n2004 000 0 eng u | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u125256 | ||
| 100 | _aPemble, S. | ||
| 245 | _aAnother fine mess | ||
| 260 | _c2004 | ||
| 490 |
_aEstates Gazette _v (0408) 21 February 2004, 127(1) |
||
| 520 | _aArgues that the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR) together with recent Court of Appeal decisions has led to uncertainty regarding the law on expert reports. With particular reference to CPR 35.10 which appears to negate the privileged status of instructions to experts, he observes that an opportunity to consider the rule was side-stepped in "Lucas v Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust" [2003] 2003 EWCA Civ 1102; [2004] 1 WLR 220". | ||
| 590 | _aABS | ||
| 590 | _aABS | ||
| 650 | _aCIVIL PROCEDURE RULES PART 35.10 | ||
| 650 | _aCIVIL PROCEDURE ACT 1997 | ||
| 650 | _aLUCAS V BARKING, HAVERING AND REDBRIDGE HOSPITALS NHS TRUST | ||
| 650 | _aPRIVILEGE | ||
| 650 | _aEXPERT EVIDENCE | ||
| 650 | _aEXPERT REPORTS | ||
| 690 | _aLAW-UK | ||
| 700 | _aWhiteley, M. | ||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 999 |
_c117060 _d117060 |
||