FAQs

We are instructed by major national and specialist law firms, smaller regional practices, barristers and public-sector bodies, including NHS organisations. Our work includes instructions from firms ranked by Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners.

We receive substantial instructions from both sides of litigation and also act as single joint experts. The same standards of independence, assessment and evidence are applied whoever instructs us.

Yes. The balance varies from year to year: at different times claimant or defendant instructions may predominate. We also accept single joint instructions.

What matters to us is that the opinion is the same whichever party instructs us. An expert’s overriding duty is to assist the Court, rather than the party paying the fee. That is also the position under CPR Part 35.

Loss of earnings is rarely just a question of applying an earnings figure. We assess the person behind the claim: their abilities, education, career history, aspirations and likely progression, together with the effects of injury or illness and the demands of real employment.

We combine this with practical understanding of recruitment, employers, career progression, rehabilitation and the labour market. This helps us assess what somebody would probably have done, what they can realistically do now and what they may be able to earn in the future.

Our experts are established occupational psychologists with substantial professional experience in their respective fields. Doherty Stobbs as a practice has been providing expert evidence for courts and tribunals since 2003, with individual experience going back to the early 1990s.

Expert work involves considerably more than preparing a report. Our experts are experienced in responding to questions on reports, conferences with legal teams and counsel, discussions between experts, joint statements and giving oral evidence where required. We understand that our role is to provide an independent opinion within our expertise and to assist the Court. Part 35 specifically provides for written questions, single joint experts, experts’ discussions and joint statements as part of that process.

Yes. Many interviews can be undertaken effectively by secure video conferencing using platforms such as Teams or Zoom. Telephone interviews can also be considered where necessary.

Whether remote interviews is appropriate depends on the individual and the questions we have been asked to address. Where an in-person interviews would provide materially better evidence, we will say so.

Sometimes, but not routinely. A good occupational assessment starts with understanding the person, their history and the questions in the case.

Psychometric or educational testing can be useful where there is a specific question about intellectual ability, learning, personality, retraining potential or another relevant characteristic. We use testing where it is likely to add useful evidence, rather than because it is a standard part of every assessment.

Yes. Where relevant, our expert opinions may be supported by targeted research into earnings, job availability, occupational requirements, career progression and regional labour markets.

No. Our expert evidence concerns employment, employability, earning capacity and vocational issues. Where injury, illness or disability is relevant, we rely on the appropriate medical, clinical or other professional evidence and consider what that evidence means for the person’s employment prospects and working life.

Initially, not very much. A brief outline of the case, the occupational questions you would like addressed, the relevant deadlines and an indication of the volume of documentation will usually allow us to advise whether we can assist and which member of the team is best suited to the instruction.

We can also help refine the occupational questions if the precise scope is not yet clear. We would rather clarify this at the beginning than undertake assessment or research that does not assist the issues in dispute.

Fees depend on the complexity of the occupational questions, the volume of records, the assessment required and whether additional labour-market research or psychometric assessment is needed.

We aim to keep fees competitive and proportionate to the work required. We can usually provide a broad indication of likely cost from an initial enquiry and a more detailed quotation once we understand the scope of the instruction and documentation. We are familiar with costs budgeting and are happy to work within agreed costs-management budgets where practicable. Costs management remains part of the current Civil Procedure Rules.

This depends on the complexity of the case, the amount of documentation and the availability of the person being assessed. Once we understand the instruction, we will give a realistic indication of timescale rather than promise a deadline that cannot sensibly be met.

If an instruction is urgent, tell us. We will be straightforward about whether we can accommodate it.

Our involvement does not necessarily end with the report. We can respond to formal questions, attend conferences with solicitors or counsel, participate in discussions with another expert, prepare joint statements and give oral evidence if required.

Where our opinion changes because of new evidence or discussion with another expert, we say so. Independence applies throughout the instruction, not simply when the first report is written. CPR Part 35 expressly provides for questions to experts and expert discussions leading to joint statements.

Yes, but we keep practical rehabilitation in line with the Rehabilitation Code and independent expert evidence clearly separate.

Doherty Stobbs can provide vocational rehabilitation, return-to-work and job-retention support where this is required. Where we have been instructed as an independent expert, we will consider carefully whether separate rehabilitation work should be undertaken by another member of the practice so that professional roles remain clear.

Email Christine Stobbs (chris@dohertystobbs.co.uk) with a brief outline of the case. We are happy to have an initial discussion about whether occupational psychology evidence would assist, what questions might usefully be addressed and which member of the team is best placed to help.

We will tell you plainly if we think we can help, if the instruction needs narrowing, or if somebody from another profession would be better placed to answer the question.

Because work matters. Loss of earnings can be one of the largest parts of a claim, but behind the figures is a working life — what somebody might have achieved, what has been lost, what remains possible and, sometimes, how they can rebuild after injury or illness.

We take a professional pride in balancing the combination of people and analysis. It means listening carefully, getting to understand someone and their work, and then testing what we have heard against the other evidence and the labour market. We also think fairness cuts both ways. Whether we are instructed for a claimant or a defendant, our job is not to make the claim larger or smaller, but to reach the most realistic view we can.