Murky waters: An expert’s perspective on the effectiveness of expert conclaves and ‘hot tubs’

Expert evidence is frequently central, if not decisive, in many complex cases. However, obtaining and dealing with expert evidence can also be a difficult, expensive and time-consuming process. Not surprisingly, many Australian courts have taken steps designed to address these issues, including the increased requirements for pre-trial joint expert meetings (or ‘conclaves’) and the use of concurrent evidence (or the ‘hot tub’) for the hearing of expert evidence in court.
 

Despite the increased use of these processes, the experiences of legal practitioners and the experts they instruct have been mixed, with significant uncertainty surrounding whether they are in fact reducing the growing costs and delays of litigation and/or ultimately leading to better outcomes in the cases in which they are used.
 

This publication examines how joint expert meetings and concurrent evidence are currently being employed by Australian courts, providing an accounting expert’s ‘inside perspective’ on the efficacy of these methods in handling expert evidence.