Reports for court · digital evidence, Plymouth
A report is worth exactly what it withstands. Somebody on the other side is being paid to take it apart, and one written to keep the party who commissioned it happy will not last the morning. CPR Part 35 decides that beforehand: an expert owes the duty to the court, above the client, the solicitor and the fee. Solicitors and insurers across Plymouth, Devon and Cornwall know this. Ours begin from it.
A quiet word first?
0800 6890668
| Kind of report | Where it is used | What goes into it |
|---|---|---|
| A findings report alone | Early advice, HR matters, board-level decisions | What was found, how it was reached, and what it means — in plain words |
| A report on an insurance loss | Where cause, extent and liability are in dispute | The findings, exhibits, and how the loss occurred |
| The CPR Part 35 expert report | Civil claims in England and Wales | The duty to the court at the head, your instructions in summary, the whole method, and both signed statements, truth and compliance |
| The CrimPR Part 19 expert report | Matters heading to a criminal court | The criminal shape: qualifications, whatever a court needs to weigh reliability, credibility declared |
| A single joint expert | Where the two sides instruct one examiner together | One report, the same for each side, with the duty running above both of them to the court |
Ring us and say as much or as little as you like; the call itself is not charged for. What it has to settle is the shape of the matter — what took place, which machines and accounts it reaches, and the question the evidence must answer. That is the scope. One written figure follows from it, and you have that before anything is opened.
The letter of instruction is summarised into the report, in our own words. Beside it goes everything touching on our credibility, starting here: an independent lab holding no accreditation. Better on page one than prised out of somebody in a witness box.
Every step is done, and written down, on the basis that the opposing examiner is watching for the joint that gives. That is what they are for. Nothing in the conclusions leans towards whoever is paying.
The forum sets the format. Civil work is written to CPR Part 35 and criminal work to CrimPR Part 19. Both need the same working parts: a written method, the exhibits, an unbroken account of where each one was and who held it, and two declarations. Conclusions go first and the technical detail into an annex.
Anything the other side cannot check is worth arguing about. So the bundle is built to be checked: the exhibit references, the images each finding was read from, every handover with a date on it, the hashes, and the notes written while the work was going on. Their own examiner can repeat the work and land in the same place.
A question worth asking any expert you are considering: the Criminal Procedure Rules oblige an expert to disclose anything a court might reasonably think undermines their credibility, and CPS guidance points at an accreditation that is not held as precisely that. Stay quiet and the problem becomes the client's. Ours appears on the first page of every report leaving this room.
One folder was shared between two companies, and the accounts in it existed in two versions that did not tally. Imaging showed editing on both, and the order in which those edits ran settled it. The matter closed inside the month.
A findings report settles two things: what was there, and how it was found. A court report holds all of that and adds four more: the duty the expert owes the court, a summary of your instructions, the method and the exhibit history from start to finish, the signed statements of truth and compliance, and anything the opposing side might raise about the expert.
The court. It makes no difference who is paying. That duty outweighs whatever is owed to the instructing party, and the ordering is precisely why the report has any value.
Yes. A single report, one set of conclusions, reaching both parties at the same moment. No draft goes out early, and nobody gets to shift the wording.
The rules require it declared, so it appears at the front rather than in small print. What a court examines is method — that is what an opinion's weight rests on, and that is where the work goes. Reports come apart because they overreach, not because a certificate is absent.
The earlier the material reaches the bench, the more time there is to set out what it shows and how it was handled. Start it here. The first look is free, and what you tell us goes no further.