Montoya v London Borough of Hackney

Posted on 15/07/2005 · Posted in Expert Witness

Judge’s ability to agree or disagree with expert evidence

It was found at trial that a property owned by the LB of Hackney was in a state of disrepair. A single joint expert had found a number of problems with the property, but submitted that the problems found were typical of properties of the age and type of the property concerned and did not amount to disrepair. The LB of Hackney appealed the judge’s finding given that he had gone against the only expert evidence in the case.

While usually reluctant to interfere with the discretion of a judge, the Queen’s Bench Division allowed the appeal because in its view there was no evidential basis for the judge to come to a conclusion contrary to the expert’s evidence. The judge had before him the evidence of a court appointed expert whose opinions were clearly expressed and with which no one or nothing disagreed.

Interested in dispute resolution services?


Disclaimer: The above case summary is derived from publicly available information and is not intended to be anything more than a statement of the author’s views on the salient factors of the case. It is not intended and should not be understood to be legal advice of any sort. All views are solely those of the author and no use of the summary should be made without statements being checked against the source of information. Expert Evidence Limited takes no responsibility for the views expressed. The copyright of the summary is owned by Expert Evidence Limited but may be used with written permission which may be forthcoming on application through the contact us page. This news item is not intended to imply or suggest that Expert Evidence Limited was involved in the case, only that it is considered an interesting legal development.