Court reports · digital evidence, Milton Keynes
A court report is not advocacy with exhibits attached. CPR Part 35 puts the expert's overriding duty to the court above any obligation to the client, the solicitor or the person settling the bill. Written on any other basis it collapses the first time it is tested — so that rule is where every report here begins.
Speak to an engineer in confidence
0800 6890668
| Report type | Where it's used | What's inside |
|---|---|---|
| Plain findings report | Board decisions, HR matters, early advice | The findings, how they were reached, conclusions in everyday words |
| Insurance and loss claims report | Questions of cause, scale and who is liable | Findings with a causation section and exhibits |
| Report under CPR Part 35 | Civil claims in England and Wales | Duty to the court set out, instructions recorded, full method, signed statements of truth and compliance |
| Report under CrimPR Part 19 | Cases before the criminal courts | The same, in the criminal form: qualifications, the material that speaks to reliability, credibility disclosed |
| One expert, jointly instructed | When the court orders a single expert for both parties | One report, both sides on equal terms, the court ranking above both |
Work opens with a confidential briefing. You set out what has happened, which devices and accounts are involved, and what the evidence needs to prove. That fixes the scope, and the scope fixes one written quote, agreed before any examination starts. The scoping itself costs nothing.
The letter of instruction is logged and summarised inside the report. Anything that might touch on our credibility — an independent lab holding no accreditation, to start with — is on the table before examination begins, not dug out afterwards by the other side.
Each step is done, and recorded, on the assumption that an opposing expert will read it in detail — which, sooner or later, one does. What we conclude doesn't shift to suit whoever instructed us.
Depending on the matter, the report is drawn to CPR Part 35 or to CrimPR Part 19: full method, exhibits, an unbroken custody chain, the statements of truth and of compliance. Conclusions come first in plain English; the technical annex sits behind them.
Everything comes to you: the report, the exhibits, the underlying files, the hash values, the continuity log and our bench notes. Another expert — or a tribunal — can then retrace every step of the work for themselves.
One question worth asking any expert you appoint: the criminal practice directions have, since April 2019, called for disclosure of anything capable of undermining an expert's reliability, and an absent accreditation is named. Bury it and the case carries the risk. Ours appears at the front of every report.
One folder gone, two companies, two accounts that would not line up. Neither version survived the image intact, and the timeline set that out in plain words. The case settled inside a month of the report landing.
The findings report covers what was found and the path to it. A court report goes further: the expert's duty to the court above all, a statement of truth, a compliance declaration, the instructions in summary, the full method, the chain of custody — plus anything that might bear on credibility.
In law, the expert's first duty is owed to the court. It outranks any duty to the party paying or instructing — and that is precisely why a compliant report carries weight.
Yes. If the court appoints a single joint expert, the same report goes to both parties on the same terms — which has a way of focusing minds.
Disclosure is required, so it gets disclosed. The court then weighs it against the method, and method is what a report stands on. Experts come unstuck by overclaiming; we state only what we can demonstrate.
Loop recording writes over the old footage, and deadlines won't wait. Open a case now — the first look costs nothing and stays confidential.