No breakfast, just coffee

While I appreciate that space can be limited, I noted that the reference to the happenings in court, especially while giving evidence, was very much of a general nature.

Perhaps this could be added to in future publications, particularly the events during the trial, the attendance at the cross-examination of other witnesses, assistance to the cross-examining counsel and what it feels like being "in purdah".

For a first-timer this can be particularly strange when no one will speak to you during intervals of evidence, whether at breaks or overnight. How do you deal with late additions to the other side's arguments and the pressures that result in providing quick answers to previously uncharted areas of a dispute?

My experience is that after reading some 40,000 pages of historical data and producing several 100-page reports, the details can appear complex. Therefore, a number of meetings with the counsel can be necessary.

On the day before giving evidence, after a day at the trial, you are asked to visit the barrister's chambers from 6pm to 11pm to go over crucial points. Then at 6am the next day, you complete a summary of your points prior to a breakfast meeting, minus breakfast but possibly with coffee, at counsel's chambers at around 8am. Court then starts at 10am.

I found it was only occasionally that the other side became aggressive, when they thought there was a flaw in the evidence and could not persuade a change of opinion.

If you are right, stand by your opinion. If there is likely to be some scope for the other side, however small, then admit it - even if this is not in your original report. It is better to acknowledge this at the time as prevarication and prolonged agrument will serve no purpose. However, for the first-timer a glance at the other side's witnesses can be off-putting as they shake their heads or exchange notes hastily. Thus, concentrate on the counsel and the judge.

Pursuing unattainable objectives is counter productive to all sides, particularly to yourself. If this course of action is followed, then the expert deserves to be chastised.

Ian Pennington, Pennington Associates