Vernon v Bosley (No 2)
[1997] 1 All ER 577, at page 601. In the latter case, Evans LJ stated, at page 603: “ …. Expert witnesses are armed with the court’s readiness to receive the expert evidence which it needs in order to reach a fully informed decision, whatever the nature of the topic may be. But their evidence ceases to be useful, and it may become counter-productive, when it is not marshalled by reference to the issues in the particular case and kept within the limits so fixed. ” Judicial condemnation of an expert who does not appreciate his responsibilities is far from uncommon: see, for example,
- ntroduction
- Error of Law
- Trafficking Decision
- The Asylum Refusal Decision
- documentary
- Decision of the FtT
- if he was a victim of trafficking this was very much at the lower end of the spectrum.
- I find as a fact that he ceased to be in a situation which might have amounted to being a victim of trafficking following his arrest in September 2012.
- Framework of this appeal
- Factual Matrix
- The Appellant’s family
- Preserved Findings
- oubt
- “ Assessment of facts and circumstances
- Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Russia
- United Kingdom
- R v SK
- Attorney General’s Reference Nos 37, 38 and 65 of 2010
- Connors and Others
- France
- ewan) v
- R (Ullah) v Special Adjudicator
- Trafficking Issues in the IAC Tribunals
- Section 82, 2002 Act
- Section 84, 2002 Act
- Ministry of Defence, ex parte Smith
- Afghanistan
- Secretary of
- Abdi
- Rantsev
- consider
- Ullah
- Amatewan
- Atamewan
- to Mogadishu) Somalia
- DECISION
- Bernard McCloskey
- Date:
- CG [2014] UKUT 00442 (IAC), [23] – [27]
- National Justice CIA Naviera SA v Prudential Assurance Company Limited
- Vernon v Bosley (No 2)
- Stevens v Gullis
- Lucas v Barking Hospitals NHS Trust
- Mibanga v Secretary of State for the Home Department