Annex G – Particular Difficulties in Children Cases We consider it important that the Legal Services Commission should work together with the courts “to find a way forward” in relation to the appointment and funding of experts in public law proceedings. We would like to make comments about two observations in Annex G: (a) it is

Questions: We turn now to looking at some of the specific questions posed in section 4 of the consultation paper. Question: What are your views on ‘proportionality’ of costs in family cases? Because the court retains control over the number, and type, of experts instructed, it will rarely be the case that a set of

Use of Experts in Family Cases: Shortage of quality experts in family cases: We understand the commitment of the Legal Services Commission to delivering services that meet the needs of clients, and deliver value for money to the taxpayer. We welcome the recognition that “there is a shortage of experts in some specialisms – particularly of

General Observations: The Family Justice Council (“FJC”) is profoundly concerned at the shortage of experts willing to provide opinion evidence in family cases. The pressure which has been placed on medical experts, particularly paediatricians, following recent widely publicised criminal cases, has had a direct effect on family cases.  That pressure exacerbates an already difficult situation

We note that it is: “The commission’s long-term aim… to arrive at a position where all experts, who are regularly instructed in Commission-funded cases, are accredited”. We acknowledge the Commission’s recognition of the risk that “accreditation proposals may discourage experts in specialisms, where there is a shortage of those willing to carry out forensic work,