Professor Doug Jones AO will participate in a panel discussion in a webinar “Roundtable on Managing Expert Witnesses: Hot-Tubbing Included!” as part of ‘ADR Online: AIAC Webinar series’ on Thursday, 18 June 2020 at 7pm MYT (GMT+8).
During this roundtable session, the panel will consider the issues below in their role as Presiding Arbitrator, Co-Arbitrators, Counsel, and Expert Witness and debate what the industry considers to be the foremost method for expert witness examinations in arbitration.
- Professor Doug Jones AO, Atkin Chambers
- Professor Janet Walker, Int-Arb Arbitrators
- Rajendra Navaratnam, Azman Davidson & Co
- Katie Chung, Norton Rose Fullbright (Asia) LLP
- Premjit Dass, Ankura
Background to the event:
From the courts of Australia came a new technique of examining expert witnesses called “Hot-Tubbing.” This technique has not only found a place in the courts but also has been widely adopted in arbitrations. While Hot-Tubbing has been oft considered, it is not the only way in which experts can be managed throughout the proceedings. Long before the emergence of Hot-Tubbing, tribunals implemented expert case management meetings as well as joint expert reports, which have arguably become a pivotal method for the conduct of effective arbitral proceedings. The apparent advantages of these methods of managing the experts, besides saving time, is that any disagreement between the experts becomes inherently obvious and they can discuss and challenge each other’s views on the spot.
This exchange can provide more clarity to the complex technical issues and make it easier to understand for a tribunal that does not have in-depth technical expertise. Although these added benefits make the expert testimony more concise, some disadvantages are that parties are not in control of the process, which can detract from their presentation of the case. To some, being able to present a story with the expert or put the other side’s expert through rigorous cross-examination is of utmost importance. When Hot-Tubbing, for example, the arbitrators control the questions and therefore, the flow of the evidence provided. In weighing the costs and benefits of managing experts, what is more important, saving time and providing clarity or allowing the parties the opportunity to present their case as they so choose?
To register, please email: email@example.com.