A claimant in a clinical negligence action wishes to obtain expert evidence on three distinct issues: whether the defendant surgeon's operative technique fell below the acceptable standard; whether the hospital's post-operative monitoring protocols were adequate; and whether the claimant's subsequent psychological harm was a foreseeable consequence of the alleged negligence. The claimant's solicitor is instructing experts and drafting letters of instruction. The claimant's legal team includes a partner who previously worked as a nurse and has strong views on appropriate post-operative care standards.
Practise this SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep question free, then download the PDF, watch the video walkthrough, or unlock timed mock exams for the full web bank.
ASeparate experts in surgery, hospital protocols, and psychiatry should be instructed, with questions limited to matters requiring specialist opinion in each field, excluding areas within the court's or solicitor's competence.
BA single medical expert with general surgical experience should be instructed to provide opinions on all three issues, as this approach is more proportionate and cost-effective, and the court prefers to receive comprehensive evidence from one expert rather than multiple reports.
CThe claimant should instruct experts on surgical technique and psychiatric harm only, because the partner's nursing experience provides sufficient in-house expertise to assess whether post-operative monitoring protocols were adequate, avoiding the need for a separate hospital administration expert.
DExperts should be instructed only on the surgical and hospital protocol issues, because foreseeability of psychiatric harm is a legal question for the court to determine by applying established principles, and does not require specialist psychiatric opinion evidence.
✓ Correct answer: A. Separate experts in surgery, hospital protocols, and psychiatry should be instructed, with questions limited to matters requiring specialist opinion in each field, excluding areas within the court's or solicitor's competence.The correct answer applies the principle that expert evidence should be limited to matters requiring specialist opinion and that questions to experts should be confined to issues genuinely outside the expertise of legal representatives and the court. Each of the three issues requires different specialist knowledge: surgical practice, hospital administration protocols, and psychiatric causation. The partner's nursing background does not provide expert-level opinion on any of these specific areas and cannot substitute for properly qualified expert evidence. Distractor 1 wrongly suggests a single expert can cover all issues. Distractor 2 incorrectly implies the partner's nursing experience can replace expert evidence. Distractor 3 wrongly suggests expert evidence on foreseeability is unnecessary. Distractor 4 incorrectly limits the number of experts arbitrarily.
Keep practising. Use the free SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep PDF, watch the YouTube walkthrough, or unlock all 10 web questions with timed mock exams.
Free practice here. Timed mocks when you are ready.
Study the SQE1 Solicitors Exam Prep free question explanations, download the PDF, then unlock timed mock exams on the web when you want exam-day practice.