Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 24, 2026

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm
Published on: December 24, 2015
Expert witness evidence in the coroner's court: Distinctions from civil litigation
Abeezar I Sarela1, Paul Marks2
1Department of Surgery, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK.
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.
Related Concept Videos
Eyewitness Memory
One such error is memory distortion, which occurs because human memory does not function like a...
The Evidence for Evolution
Torts II
Torts I
Intentional...
Introduction to Epidemiology
Torts III
Quasi-intentional torts in healthcare involve acts where intent is not directed to harm an individual but results in harm due to careless or reckless speech.

