CASE HUB ARCHIVED–this archived case hub reflects the position at the date of the abandonment of the transaction of 27 February 2019; it is no longer maintained. See further, timeline and commentary. Case facts Outline UK merger investigation into the proposed acquisition by Experian Limited of Credit Laser Holdings Limited (ClearScore). The transaction involves horizontal overlaps in markets for credit-score checking and related services in the UK. Latest developments On 27 February 2019, the parties abandoned the transaction. On the same day, the CMA cancelled the merger reference. Parties Experian is a Irish headquartered group (listed on the London Stock Exchange) that is the world’s leading global information services company. Experian operates in 37 countries throughout the world. Credit Laser Holdings (Clearscore) is a UK based company that provides free credit score checks to UK consumers. Market(s) The CMA considered the markets for the supply of: (a) CCPs for loans and credit cards in the UK; (b) CCTs in the UK; and (c) pre-qualification services in the UK. In relation to (a) and (b), these services

A process where an independent expert is asked to make key findings of fact necessary to end a dispute.

Expert determination is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). This Practice Note explains expert determination for technical or contract interpretation disputes. It defines expert determination and considers the agreement between the parties for choosing/appointing the expert. The expert’s jurisdiction and the binding nature of the decision given are explored and the procedure, limitation and claims against experts are also covered. For guidance generally on ADR and other forms of ADR, see Practice Notes: • What is ADR? • Which form of ADR? What is expert determination? Expert determination is a binding dispute resolution process involving an independent expert in a relevant discipline determining a dispute between parties in accordance with provisions agreed by the parties. Usually references to expert determination are made when there is an existing agreement which provides for expert determination to determine a particular issue. Generally, expert determination is an appropriate mechanism for resolving technical disputes, such as rent reviews (by a surveyor), share valuations (by an accountant) or the interpretation of a contractual mechanism (by counsel). In the field

1 Any dispute arising out of or in connection with this [Agreement OR Contract OR clause [insert clause number]] (a Dispute) shall be referred to determination

Construction analysis: The High Court granted the defendants’ application for a stay of proceedings to allow for expert determination, in a dispute under a contact for the sale of land. The court rejected the claimant’s arguments that the contractual expert determination clause did not apply to the dispute in question, finding that the clause was a ‘one-stop shop’ for all disputes arising under the contract, and that the clause was separable from the underlying contract.

Construction analysis: The Technology and Construction Court (TCC) held that an expert determination was not binding where it rested on a contractual variation that could not legally occur. The parties’ agreements contained strict no-oral-modification (NOM) clauses, however the expert had treated informal conduct, including a lack of challenge to interim payment certificates, as creating a binding variation. The court applied MWB v Rock Advertising and confirmed that NOM clauses must be enforced and that informal variations are ineffective unless the requirements for estoppel are clearly met. The court also applied the principles in Premier Telecommunications v Webb, under which an expert’s determination will not bind the parties if the expert makes a material legal error or steps outside their contractual remit. On that basis, the expert’s determination that there had been a variation could not stand. The court granted summary judgment, leaving the underlying substantive issues to be resolved separately.

Family analysis: Abigail Bond, barrister at St John’s Chambers, looks at the court’s approach to an application to remove a child to a non-Hague Convention country and the difficulties in funding the appointed expert.

This Checklist on expert evidence in Scottish civil litigation identifies the key considerations for a solicitor considering instructing an expert in a civil dispute in the Scottish courts. This Practice Note should be read in conjunction with Practice Notes: Expert evidence in Scottish civil litigation—general considerations and Leading expert evidence in Scottish civil litigation—rules and procedure. Issue Considerations Assessing the need for an expert witness —What is the nature of the dispute (for example, an expert report is generally required before a claim for professional negligence is raised)?—Is it reasonable and proportionate to use an expert given the value of the claim?—Do you need more than one expert? Admissibility of the expert evidence —Do I need an expert to help the court make a decision in the case?—Does the expert have the necessary knowledge and experience?—Will the expert be impartial

This Practice Note provides a detailed analysis of the core principles and general considerations involved in the use of expert evidence in Scottish civil litigation. For detailed guidance on the rules and procedure that relate to expert witnesses and expert evidence, see Practice Note: Leading expert evidence in Scottish civil litigation—rules and procedure. What is the function of an expert witness? In Scotland, ‘skilled witness’ is often used interchangeably with ‘expert witness’. In this Practice Note, ‘expert witness’ will be used for consistency. Expert evidence is where someone uses their knowledge and expertise to assist the court. An expert witness uses their specialist knowledge to give factual evidence and evidence of opinion on agreed facts or facts which others have put before the court. This is in sharp contrast to a lay witness to fact who can only give evidence about what they have directly observed; any opinion evidence they give will usually be inadmissible. See: Expert witnesses: Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia [180]. The function of the expert is to assist the court

This Practice Note deals with the position regarding the evidence of an expert witness called in criminal proceedings under the Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pt 19 and the Criminal Practice Directions A party may only rely on an expert to give evidence on an issue that is beyond the knowledge of the judge or jury. A person may only hold themselves out as an expert if they are suitably qualified—the determination of which is a matter for the judge, who will consider: • whether the opinion is part of a body of knowledge and experience with sufficient organisation to be considered reliable, and • whether the witness has acquired, by study or experience, sufficient knowledge of the subject such that their evidence would be of value in assisting the court in determining a particular issue(s) See R v Bonython (1984) 38 SASR 45 (not reported by LexisNexis®) and R v Hodges. CrimPR 2025, SI 2025/909, Pt 19 sets out the procedure for introducing expert evidence.

This Practice Note deals with adducing expert evidence in private law children proceedings. It details the relevant statutory provisions (in particular Part 25 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010) and the associated Practice Directions) and the definition of an expert. It also considers when expert evidence will be necessary, the procedure on an application for permission and, the instruction of experts, including a single joint expert (SJE) and payment of the expert’s fees, including the requirements concerning regulated experts that apply to proceedings issued on or after 20 July 2026. For practical guidance on evidence in private law children proceedings, see Practice Note: Evidence in private law children proceedings. The common law rule is that a witness should give evidence as to facts rather than opinion, save where a witness is qualified to give expert evidence and therefore to give their opinion on a relevant matter. The court is under a duty to restrict expert evidence to that which in the opinion of the court is necessary to assist the court to resolve

This Practice Note deals with expert evidence in public law children proceedings, including in care and adoption proceedings. It details the relevant statutory provisions and the definition of an expert. It also considers when expert evidence will be necessary, the procedure on an application for permission and the instruction of experts and payment of experts’ fees, including the requirements concerning regulated experts that apply to proceedings issued on or after 20 July 2026. For practical guidance on evidence in public children proceedings generally, see Practice Notes: Evidence and witnesses in public children proceedings and Specific evidential issues and disclosure in public children proceedings. The common law rule is that a witness should give evidence as to facts rather than opinion, save where a witness is qualified to give expert evidence and therefore to give their opinion on a relevant matter. The court is under a duty to restrict expert evidence to that which in the opinion of the court is necessary to assist the court to resolve the proceedings justly. Expert evidence in public