Document library

Search for information and expand your knowledge.

Back to results

Foreign law expert evidence and the assessment of damages for personal injury: High Court restates the Court of Appeal’s guiding principles in Wall v Mutuelle de Poitiers

 

A recent High Court decision confirms the correct approach to be taken with the nature and scope of expert evidence in a claim for personal injury damages to which a foreign law applies.

 

In Mihailovskis v Amlin Insurance SE [2020 EWHC extempore], Master Davison allowed an application by the claimants to exclude the defendant’s Belgian law expert evidence. He dismissed the defendant’s cross-application for permission to rely on evidence from a Belgian medico-legal expert.

 

The decision follows the guidance originally set out by the Court of Appeal in Wall v Mutuelle de Poitiers [2014] EWCA Civ 138. In that case, the Court of Appeal made it clear that in claims for personal injury damages before the English court to which a foreign law applies, the rules of English procedure must be followed. The parties should only be given permission to rely on expert evidence as to the foreign law. It is not appropriate for the parties to have permission to rely on a report from a foreign medico-legal examiner or forensic expert, even though that may form part of the procedure for assessing personal injury damages in the courts of the country whose law the English court is required to apply pursuant to Rome II (Regulation EC 864/2007).

 

Documenttype Bulletin
Author Chris Deavon et al
Year of publication 2020
EEG
Language English