What to Look for in an Expert Witness CV Before Instructing

An expert witness curriculum vitae is more than a list of qualifications. It tells a solicitor whether the doctor has the right clinical experience, understands the demands of the court, and is likely to deliver a report that will survive scrutiny. Reading it with care can prevent costly mistakes.

Why the CV Matters

Solicitors usually choose experts under time pressure, and the CV is often the first document they see. A good one answers practical questions quickly. Is this doctor registered and in good standing? Do they treat the condition in question? Have they written reports before, and for whom?

Many practices tailor the CV to the case. The page for Marco Scarci's medico-legal CV invites solicitors to contact the practice to discuss a case and receive a CV based on their needs, appointments and fee estimates. That approach is useful, but it should not replace an independent check of the facts.

The CV is also a starting point for questions. Gaps, vague descriptions or claims that cannot be verified are reasons to ask for more detail before agreeing to instruct. A short telephone conversation before instruction often reveals more than the document, such as how the expert approaches uncertainty and what they expect from the instructing solicitor.

What the Regulator Expects of Doctors Who Act as Experts

The General Medical Council sets standards for doctors who provide evidence in legal proceedings. Its guidance on providing witness statements or expert evidence sets out ten principles of good practice, along with specific responsibilities for witnesses of fact and expert witnesses, and came into effect on 30 January 2024.

The guidance says medical professionals must give objective and impartial advice if giving an expert opinion on matters within their competence, and that where they have a potential or actual conflict of interest, they must follow the GMC's guidance on identifying and managing conflicts of interest.

Those expectations suggest what to look for. A CV should show that the doctor works within their competence, discloses relevant interests, and treats the duty to the court as the priority. Experts who treat the CV as marketing tend to overstate. Experts who treat it as a statement of fact to be defended in cross-examination tend to be accurate.

Clinical Credentials and Current Practice

Start with registration and qualifications. Check the doctor's entry on the GMC register, and confirm degrees, surgical fellowships and specialist status. A thoracic surgeon, for example, might hold the Fellowship of the Royal College of Surgeons and relevant European or American fellowships.

Then look at current practice. Courts tend to value experts who still treat the conditions at issue, since they know today's standards. A CV should show hospital posts, the volume and type of operations performed, and any special interests that match the claim.

Academic and editorial roles add context. Marco Scarci's practice states that he is involved in the leadership of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons and acts as an associate editor of journals including the Journal of Thoracic Diseases. Such roles suggest standing among peers, though they say little about report writing. Ask for examples of how the doctor explains medicine to lay readers. Clarity counts.

Medico-Legal Experience and Training

The next question is how much medico-legal work the doctor does and of what kind. The practice states that its consultant produces approximately four to five reports a month alongside full-time clinical work, and has experience with joint experts' reports and coroners' courts. A solicitor can ask for a breakdown by claimant and defendant work, and by type of case.

Training matters because writing for a court is a skill. The practice lists Bond-Solon expert witness training, and quality assurance of reports by a law graduate. Ask what the training covered and when it was completed.

Be cautious about numbers that cannot be checked, such as a statement that hundreds of reports have been written. Ask for examples of the types of cases, the courts attended, and whether any report has been criticized. A candid answer, including the occasional criticism, is more reassuring than a spotless record. Candour matters. Ask plainly.

Red Flags and How to Verify

The Civil Justice Council's guidance suggests several checks before an expert is instructed. It says to establish whether the expert has the appropriate expertise and experience for the particular instruction, is familiar with the general duties of an expert, can produce a report within a reasonable time and at proportionate cost, is available to attend trial, and has no potential conflict of interest.

Red flags include an unwillingness to say what falls outside the expert's field, promises about outcomes, fees linked to the result of the case, and a CV that changes between versions without explanation. The same guidance strongly discourages payment of experts' fees contingent on the outcome of the case.

Verification is simple. Check the register, ask for a recent redacted report as a sample, speak to the expert before instructing and put the terms of appointment in writing.