Asked by: James Naish (Labour - Rushcliffe)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether she will take steps to restrict the ability for psychologists not accredited by the Health and Care Professions Council to act as expert witnesses in all court settings.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is aware of concerns regarding unregulated experts, often using the title psychologist, being instructed in the family courts. We are working with the Family Procedure Rule Committee on this issue to make changes to the Family Procedure Rules and their associated Practice Directions to restrict the instruction of these experts.
In the criminal courts, the evidence of expert witnesses is governed by the law on admissibility. Expert evidence is only admissible if the witness is competent to give that opinion and the expert opinion is sufficiently reliable to be admitted. When determining the reliability of expert opinion, the court may take into account the validity of the methodology employed by the expert, the extent to which the opinion is based on material falling outside the expert’s own field of expertise, and lack of an accreditation or other commitment to prescribed standards where that might be expected. The factors that courts should consider are clearly set out in Practice Directions.
In civil proceedings the role of experts is governed by Part 35 of the Civil Procedure Rules. The court’s permission is required for expert evidence to be used. Before permission is granted the relevant party must confirm the field in which expert evidence is required, the issues which the expert will address and, where practicable, the name of the expert. Their report must state the expert’s qualifications and confirm any question or issue which falls outside their expertise. While experts always owe a duty to exercise reasonable skill and care to those instructing them and to comply with any relevant professional code, they have an overriding duty to the court to help the court on matters within their experience and their evidence must be independent of the party instructing them. It is open to parties in civil disputes to challenge the qualifications or suitability of an expert witness if they have any concerns. The adversarial nature of civil litigation enables challenges and cross-examination to expert evidence.