This Practice Note considers issues relating to the instruction of a forensic accountant to provide expert evidence as to the valuation of company or business assets within financial remedy proceedings, including applications for permission, matters to be dealt with in the letter of instruction, valuation methodology and minority interests. Where a party to financial remedy proceedings has an interest in a business, the court will frequently direct that it be valued. The procedural provisions relating to experts are set out in Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 25—see also: Instructing an expert. A valuation by a forensic accountant may be needed for the computation stage of financial remedy proceedings. The accountant's expertise may also be required to analyse and/or consider potential solutions at the dispositive stage of the process, for example: • if there is a need to extract cash from the business, including to fund a lump sum by instalments/series of lump sums • where the order will involve a transfer of shares from one party

This Practice Note highlights some issues to consider when instructing an expert under CPR 35 and the Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims. It focuses on the important issue of the optimum time to appoint an expert, giving guidance on the sorts of issues to consider, particularly if appointing pre-issue of a claim form. Practical assistance is given on the letter of instruction and accompanying documents. Communications with experts, including privilege, are also addressed. When instructing experts you are expected to have regard to: • all relevant CPR Rules and Practice Directions • the Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims ('the Guidance'). See Practice Note: Instructing an expert under the Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims • the Practice Direction Pre-Action Conduct and Protocols, para 7 and any other protocol that applies to the type of claim • any other guidance relating to their expertise This Practice Note assumes permission has been obtained to adduce expert evidence and that this is not a case where a single

Due to the nature of construction projects and disputes, it will often be necessary to instruct an expert in a particular field. This is recognised in the Technology and Construction Court Guide (TCC Guide), which also acknowledges that experts are often required to be engaged by the parties at a very early pre-action stage. Of course, an expert may also be instructed to advise in non-litigation situations, such as to assist with determining liability at the outset of a claim, opining on remedial solutions, or assisting with adjudications and other forms of dispute resolution such as negotiation, mediation and arbitration. This Practice Note considers some of the issues that arise once a decision has been made to instruct an expert (as an expert advisor or expert witness), including when the expert should be instructed, the scope of the instruction letter and documents to be issued. For information on the duties that an expert may carry out, see Practice Notes: TCC—expert evidence and Duties of an expert. When to instruct an expert? There are a

This Practice Note provides guidance on an expert's and their instructing solicitors' key obligations under the ‘Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims’ introduced on 1 December 2014. This Practice Note should be considered in conjunction with: • Practice Note: Instructing an expert • Checklist—letter of instruction to expert • precedent: Letter of instruction to own expert Note: • 'Guidance' means the Civil Justice Council's Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims which came into force on 1 December 2014 The focus of the Guidance is to ensure that: • experts are instructed only when their evidence is required • an instructed expert is the right expert to opine on the issues in dispute • the expert has all the information (including documents and information as to the progress of the case and all relevant hearings) to enable them to work effectively towards providing their expert opinion. • the expert is kept aware of case and cost management developments.

This Practice Note considers practical issues relating to the use of expert witness evidence in arbitration proceedings, including on the instruction and management of such witnesses. This Practice Note may be read in conjunction with Practice Note: Expert witnesses in arbitration, which considers the framework within which expert evidence is presented in arbitration proceedings. Is expert evidence needed? Before deciding whether to instruct an expert, you must define as precisely as possible the issues on which an expert opinion may be needed. Can the issues be defined clearly and are they limited to one area of expertise? If they straddle different fields, are multiple experts needed or could one expert cover all of them? If the area is highly technical consider whether it may be difficult to find a suitable expert at all. Instructing an expert is a significant step in any proceedings: the cost can be high and it entails ceding a degree of control to the tribunal to whom the expert’s primary duty (as a matter of English law at least) is owed, not

Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 (CrimPR 2025), SI 2025/909, Pt 19 sets out the requirements for introducing expert evidence in criminal proceedings. The CrimPR should be read in conjunction with chapter 7 of the Criminal Practice Directions. Together, these rules provide for greater scrutiny of the reliability and admissibility of expert evidence and also set out the issues and information which must be addressed when instructing expert reports. For information on the admissibility of expert evidence, the duties imposed on experts and the procedure for the introduction of expert evidence in criminal proceedings, see Practice Note: Expert evidence in criminal proceedings. Content of experts' reports Given the necessity of compliance with the CrimPR 2025, SI 2025/909, it is advisable for practitioners to include the following relevant requirements in any letter of instruction to an expert in criminal proceedings in order to comply with CrimPR 2025, SI 2025/909, r 19.4: • give details of the expert’s qualifications, relevant experience and accreditations. Practitioners must satisfy themselves as to the expertise of those they are instructing • give details

This Practice Note provides guidance on the instruction of a single joint expert witness in financial proceedings under the Family Procedure Rules 2010 (FPR 2010), SI 2010/2955, Pt 25 and supporting practice directions, including what to consider before a formal instruction, the application for permission, the contents of the letter of instruction and how to deal with supplemental instructions. It also covers the general approach to expert evidence, the form and content of the expert’s report and the provisions for meetings and discussions between experts in cases where each party has instructed their own expert. General principles The following principles have general application: • expert evidence will be restricted to that which in the opinion of the court is necessary to assist the court to resolve the proceedings • it is the duty of experts to help the court on matters within their expertise—this duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom experts have received instructions or by whom they are paid • no party may put expert evidence (in any form) before the court without

Single joint experts and joint statements prepared by experts The rules on instructing experts and disclosure of expert reports in civil cases are contained in CPR part 35 and PD 35 with additional guidance provided by the Guidance for the instruction of experts in civil claims. The rules are clear on disclosure of a report which is prepared by a single joint expert. Guidance for the Instruction of Experts in Civil Claims 2014 explains that “Single joint experts should serve their reports simultaneously on all instructing parties.” For an explanation of jointly instructed experts, see our Practice Note: Single joint experts. There is no general rule that all expert evidence is disclosable regardless of privilege. The issue of the status of an undisclosed report was considered in Odedra. It was held that there is no authority under the CPR or in case law

When is it necessary to instruct a psychiatrist? Psychiatrists are frequently asked to assess the decision making capacity of protected persons (Ps) who are the subject of the proceedings in the Court of Protection. Psychiatrists are also occasionally asked to give their view about P’s best interests. For further information on mental capacity, see Practice Notes: Mental capacity—an introduction and Mental capacity—assessments and tests. It is important to note at the outset that it is not always necessary to instruct a psychiatrist to assess capacity. Capacity assessments may be carried out by a raft of professionals, including psychologists, general practitioners (GPs), social workers and speech and language therapists. In some cases, especially where P’s capacity is borderline or fluctuating, it can avoid considerable delay and expense to instruct a psychiatrist to assess P’s capacity. This is particularly the case where the psychiatrist is experienced in undertaking capacity assessments and has particular expertise in the relevant field, such as working with older people or people with learning difficulties. A

This Practice Note is intended for law firms and individuals regulated by the SRA. It considers the requirements in the SRA Codes of Conduct in relation to instructing third parties. There is a separate Practice Note for situations where clients are referred to you by third parties—see Practice Note: Referral and fee sharing arrangements. See also section: Difference between instructing and introduction to a third party and separate Practice Note: Introductions to third parties. SRA regime The SRA's core regulatory requirements are found in the SRA Code of Conduct for Solicitors, RELs, RFLs and RSLs (Code for Individuals) and the SRA Code of Conduct for Firms (Code for Firms), which should be read in the context of the SRA Principles. Difference between instructing and introduction to a third party The SRA Codes of Conduct impose specific obligations in relation to ‘referrals, introductions and separate businesses’. Although it is not entirely clear, the language of the Codes tend to suggest these obligations apply when referring or introducing your client to external third parties (or receiving referrals

1 Introduction 1.1 This policy describes our approach to instructing experts, barristers and other third parties to provide input into a client’s matter. For the sake of simplicity, these are collectively called ‘third parties’ in this policy. 2 Difference between instructing a third party and introducing a client to a third party 2.1 Instructing a third party is not the same as introducing your client to a third party, such as a financial adviser or other lawyer. The difference, in practical terms, is set out in the table below: Features of instructing a third party on a client’s matter Features of introducing the client to a third party We retain control of the matter on which we have instructed the third party The third party advises the client independently of the firm We have overall responsibility for that matter We are not responsible for the advice given by the third party The third party has a relationship with us rather than directly with the client The third party has a direct relationship with the client The third party invoices the firm The third party invoices the client directly

This Checklist is designed to help you determine whether you have the systems in place to comply with regulatory requirements that apply to law firms in relation to instructing third parties. It should be read in conjunction with subtopic: Instructing third parties. Selecting and evaluating third parties Requirement Compulsory or recommended Comments (if any) ☐  Implement systems and procedures to select and evaluate third parties you instruct on clients’ behalf See Precedents: Instructing third parties policy, Third parties register and Third party evaluation form Compulsory for Lexcel accredited firms, otherwise recommended Lexcel England and Wales v6.1: Standard for legal practices, para 7.5 (Insert any comments you may wish to make regarding your firm’s arrangements) ☐  Implement systems and procedures to: —consult with your client in relation to the selection of the expert or barrister, where appropriate—advise your client of:• the name and status of the person being instructed • if the client will have to fund the disbursement, the cost involved, and • the likely time they will take to respond See Precedent: Instructing third parties policy