Expert witness evidence in the coroner's court: Distinctions from civil litigation.

Abstract

Healthcare professionals often serve as expert witnesses in coroners' courts and have to provide reports, but the specific requirements have not been clearly articulated. The Chief Coroner's Bench Book advises that expert reports should follow Civil Procedure Rules Part 35, yet the inquisitorial nature of coronial proceedings creates important differences from civil litigation. In keeping with the Coroners and Justice Act, experts must avoid language that implies civil or criminal liability on the part of a named person when opining on standards of care; instead, they should express themselves in neutral terms. Unlike civil litigation, where a 'but for' test applies to proving causation, on balance of probabilities, the coronial threshold requires identification of the acts or omissions that contributed more than minimally, negligibly or trivially to death. Understanding these distinctions is essential to produce reports that are appropriate both in law and in purpose.