Mrs Justice Yip highlights a problem that we are all too familiar with regarding experts' agendas in David John Saunders -v- Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust  EWHC 343 (QB).
Two agendas were produced for the experts' meeting resulting in a joint statement that was 60 pages long. Mrs Justice Yip said that she could see no good reason why the parties were unable to agree a single agenda.
I sympathise with the lawyers in this case and understand how the decision is reached to produce two agendas but I agree that sometimes less is more and that adopting a collaborative approach is far more helpful to the court.
“The joint statement is an important document. It ought to be possible to read it and to understand the key issues and each expert’s position on those issues. Sometimes less is more as far as the agenda is concerned.” “The agenda must not be in the form of leading questions or hostile in tone.“