Selected experience · Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
Yorke v Katra
[2003] EWCA Civ 867
[2003] EWCA Civ 867
Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
2003
Counsel for the claimant/respondent, instructed by Porter & Co
Civil procedure and single joint experts
Lord Justice Buxton and Lord Justice Dyson (later Lord Dyson, Justice of the Supreme Court)
Alexander appeared for the respondent in a Court of Appeal case concerning instructions to a single joint expert, procedural discretion and the proper operation of CPR 35.8.
Case overview
A building dispute became procedurally complex after the defendant altered a proposed joint letter of instruction to an expert. His defence and counterclaim were struck out for failure to comply with an order requiring the letter to be signed in its original form.
Principal issues or remedies
- Whether the court could require the parties to send only a single jointly agreed letter of instruction to a single joint expert.
- The effect of CPR 35.8, which permits each instructing party to give instructions to the expert.
- Whether procedural defects in the defendant's challenge justified maintaining the strike-out orders.
Alexander's role, work and outcome
The Court of Appeal allowed the defendant's appeal, holding that the order requiring a single agreed letter of instruction was not justified by CPR 35.8. The judgment records Alexander's treatment of that point for the respondent and expressly states that no criticism attached to either advocate appearing before it.
Why the case matters
The decision is a useful Court of Appeal authority on separate instructions to a single joint expert and on avoiding disproportionate procedural consequences where an underlying order was made on a mistaken basis.