The Practice Direction: What Expert Witnesses Must Follow

Last updated: 16 September 2026

Photo: Civil Party Co-Lawyer Mr. Lor Chunty - Khmer Rouge Tribunal (ECCC)

Expert witnesses in UK asylum cases must follow specific rules. The most important is the practice direction expert witnesses are bound by: Practice Direction 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. This document sets out what every expert report must contain and how experts must behave. If an expert ignores these rules, the tribunal may reject or give less weight to their report. Therefore, both lawyers and experts must understand what the practice direction requires.[1]

This guide explains the key rules for expert witnesses in asylum cases. It covers the UK's Practice Direction 10, the Civil Procedure Rules Part 35, and the expert's duty to the court. Additionally, it provides a comparison with US rules under the Federal Rules of Evidence. Whether you are a lawyer preparing an asylum case or an expert writing a report, this article will help you understand your obligations.

UK Practice Direction 10: The Key Rules

Practice Direction 10 applies to all expert evidence in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal. It was introduced to improve the quality and reliability of expert reports in immigration cases. The practice direction sets out clear requirements that every expert must follow.[2]

First, the expert must provide a statement of their qualifications and experience. This tells the tribunal why this person is qualified to give an opinion on the subject. Second, the report must list all documents the expert has seen and relied upon. Third, the expert must explain their methodology. This means describing how they researched the issues and reached their conclusions. Furthermore, the report must contain a clear statement that the expert understands their duty to the tribunal and has complied with it.

Practice Direction 10 also requires the expert to identify any areas where their opinion is outside their expertise. If the expert is not sure about something, they must say so. Honesty about the limits of knowledge is essential. Moreover, the expert must state if there is a range of opinion on a particular issue. They cannot present only one view if respected sources disagree.

The Expert's Overriding Duty to the Court

The most important rule for any expert witness is simple: your duty is to the court, not to the party who pays you. This is a fundamental principle in both UK and US law. It means the expert must give honest, independent, and balanced evidence. They must not act as an advocate for the side that instructed them.[3]

In practice, this means the expert must include information that may harm the instructing party's case. For example, if country evidence shows that conditions have improved for the client's group, the expert must mention this. They cannot hide unfavourable evidence. Additionally, the expert must not accept instructions that try to influence their opinion. If a lawyer asks the expert to reach a specific conclusion, the expert must refuse.

It is the duty of an expert to help the court on the matters within his expertise. This duty overrides any obligation to the person from whom he has received instructions or by whom he is paid.
Civil Procedure Rules 1998 (UK), Part 35, Rule 35.3

Judges take this duty very seriously. If a tribunal finds that an expert has acted as an advocate rather than an independent witness, the report will carry little or no weight. In some cases, the tribunal may criticise the expert by name in its decision. Therefore, maintaining independence is not just ethical. It is practical.

CPR Part 35: What the Report Must Contain

The Civil Procedure Rules Part 35 applies to expert evidence in civil proceedings in England and Wales. While the Immigration and Asylum Chamber has its own Practice Direction, CPR Part 35 principles are widely followed in tribunal cases as well. The key requirements are clear and specific.[4]

Under CPR Part 35, the expert report must contain a declaration. This declaration states that the expert understands their duty to the court. It confirms that the expert has complied with that duty. It also confirms that the expert is aware that they may face proceedings for contempt of court if they make a false statement. Furthermore, the report must include a "statement of truth." This is a formal statement confirming that the opinions expressed are the expert's true and complete opinions.

The report must also list the expert's qualifications. It must state the range of opinion on any disputed point. If the expert has relied on research by others, they must identify the source. Moreover, the report must include a summary of conclusions at the end. This summary helps the judge quickly understand the expert's main findings.

What the Report Must Contain: Full List

The following table summarises every element that a compliant expert report should include. Lawyers should use this as a checklist when reviewing reports. Experts should use it when drafting. Missing any of these elements could result in the report being given less weight by the tribunal.[5]

US Comparison: Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and Daubert

In the United States, expert witness evidence in immigration court is governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE), particularly Rule 702. This rule states that an expert may testify if their knowledge will help the court understand the evidence or decide a fact. The expert must be qualified by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.[6]

The US system is less prescriptive than the UK. There is no single practice direction that lists exactly what a report must contain. However, the principles established by the Supreme Court in Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals (1993) set similar standards. Under Daubert, the judge acts as a "gatekeeper." They must assess whether the expert's testimony is based on reliable methods and is relevant to the case. The Daubert factors include whether the methodology can be tested, whether it has been peer-reviewed, its error rate, and whether it is generally accepted in the field.[7]

In practice, US immigration judges expect expert reports to include the same basic elements as UK reports. They want to see the expert's qualifications, their methodology, the sources they used, and clear conclusions. While the format is less strictly regulated, a poorly structured report will still carry less weight. Therefore, experts writing for US courts should follow the same best practices as those writing for the UK tribunal.

Common Failures in Expert Reports

Understanding what goes wrong helps lawyers spot problems early. One common failure is the absence of a proper declaration of independence. Some experts submit reports without stating their duty to the court. This is a basic error that immediately raises concerns about the report's reliability.

Another frequent problem is poor methodology. If the expert does not explain how they reached their conclusions, the tribunal cannot assess the reliability of those conclusions. For example, an expert who says "conditions in Country X are dangerous" without citing any sources is making an unsupported assertion. Moreover, some experts express opinions on matters outside their expertise. A country conditions expert should not give opinions on medical issues, and vice versa.

Additionally, some reports fail to acknowledge the range of opinion on disputed issues. If there is genuine disagreement among experts or within the human rights community about conditions in a country, the report must say so. Presenting only one perspective makes the expert appear biased.

How The Human Rights Ensures Compliance

Every expert report from The Human Rights is written to meet the requirements of Practice Direction 10, CPR Part 35, and FRE 702. Our quality assurance process includes a compliance check before every report is sent to the instructing lawyer. This check verifies that the report contains all required elements. These include the declaration of independence, the statement of truth, a full list of documents considered, a clear methodology, and a summary of conclusions.[9]

Our experts are trained on their duty to the court. They understand that independence and honesty are not optional. If an expert's findings do not support the client's case, the report will say so. This approach builds trust with tribunals and courts. Judges know that a report from The Human Rights is reliable. To find an expert witness for your case, visit our directory and select the relevant country.

Conclusion

The practice direction expert witnesses must follow is not just a set of bureaucratic rules. It exists to ensure that expert evidence is reliable, independent, and helpful to the court. In the UK, Practice Direction 10 and CPR Part 35 set clear standards. In the US, FRE 702 and the Daubert principles serve a similar purpose. Every expert report must contain a declaration of independence, a statement of truth, a methodology section, a list of documents considered, and an acknowledgement of the limits of the expert's knowledge. Failure to comply with these rules can result in the report being given reduced weight or excluded entirely. For lawyers, checking compliance before submitting a report is essential. For experts, following the practice direction is both a professional obligation and a practical necessity.