HT-2022-000090 - [2025] EWHC 723 (TCC)

The Expert Evidence

For the reasons already explained, the only expert evidence was from Mr Alyah, for the Claimant. Although there were some shortcomings in his approach, which were appropriately explored by Mr Smith in cross-examination, I reject the submission that, taken as a whole, his evidence was unsatisfactory. I take the limitations of some of the analysis he has undertaken into account, but for the reasons I now turn to, I consider that the key parts of his technical analysis in support of the reasonableness of SEPD’s decision, from a technical perspective, were robust and cogent.

Mr Alyah accepted, as is apparent from the face of his report, that he based his conclusions on the information drawn from the reports which have been referred to above, and in particular the photographs within the EA Report, and the test reports showing the continued failure to achieve the reduced 10MΩ @ 5kV requirement for resistance. Mr Alyah had not undertaken his own examination of the cables or joints, or carried out, for example, his own tests on backfill or soil composition.