Challenges in Expert Evidence in Memorial Style Pleadings in the Arbitration
In recent times, there has been an increase in the parties favouring memorial style pleadings over more traditional common law pleadings. A memorial style pleading requires an expert assessment to determine the claims pleaded by a party to the case. Naturally, this would increase the role and the responsibility of the Expert in any dispute. The article briefly discusses the challenges Expert’s face in providing Expert Evidence to the Tribunal in memorial style pleadings. My experience predominantly lies in matters of Delay and Quantum; hence I shall discuss challenges faced by experts in these matters.
Challenges in Expert Evidence in Memorial Style Pleadings in the Arbitration
To overcome from the challenges, the Expert, when making a delay assessment, he or she should consider the following:
- Not to solely rely on the programming data
- Verify the contemporaneous updated programmes, particularly the actual start, actual finish and completion status at each window periods.
- Verify and validate the accuracy of the progress or asbuilt data being entered into the programme derived from the factual data and records.
- Determine the total floats and be cautious about the same.
- Sort out the most reliable data and understand how the project was planned to be completed vis-à-vis how it was actually completed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Get answers to frequently asked questions about everything we do.
What are memorial style pleadings in arbitration?
Memorial style pleadings combine the parties’ statements of case with supporting witness statements and expert reports from the outset, as opposed to traditional common law pleadings which follow a staged process with multiple rounds of submissions and disclosure.