Part 25 of the Family Procedure Rules 2010 is the primary legal framework governing expert evidence in family proceedings in England and Wales. It applies in the Family Court and the High Court (Family Division) in all proceedings concerning children, financial remedies, and other family matters. Practice Direction 25B supplements Part 25 with detailed requirements for the content of expert reports and letters of instruction.
The most significant feature of Part 25 — and the feature that most distinguishes it from CrimPR Rule 19 and CPR Part 35 — is the requirement for court permission before any expert can be instructed. Under Rule 25.4, no party may instruct an expert without the court's permission, and the court will grant permission only where expert evidence is necessary to assist the court to resolve the proceedings. This necessity test, introduced by s.13(6) of the Children and Families Act 2014, is a higher threshold than the 'reasonably required' standard in civil proceedings.
For family law solicitors, understanding Part 25 is not optional. A report obtained without court permission is inadmissible. A report that does not comply with Practice Direction 25B may be challenged and excluded. Getting the procedural framework right from the outset protects the client, protects the case, and protects the expert.
Part 25 contains six rules. Each rule addresses a distinct aspect of the expert evidence framework in family proceedings.
Practice Direction 25B supplements FPR Part 25 with 12 mandatory requirements for the content of every expert report in family proceedings. A report that omits any of these elements may be challenged as non-compliant and the court may refuse to admit it.
The expert's full name, professional qualifications, and the institution that awarded them. Where the expert holds a specialist register status (such as GMC Specialist Register or HCPC Register), this must be stated.
The expert's current professional registration details, including the name of the regulatory body, the registration number, and any conditions or restrictions on registration.
A statement of the substance of all instructions received from all parties, whether written or oral. This ensures transparency and allows the court to assess whether the expert has been given a balanced and accurate account of the facts.
The facts and assumptions on which the opinion is based. Where the expert has been given competing versions of events, the report must address each version and state the opinion on each.
The expert's opinion on each question asked in the letter of instruction. The opinion must be expressed clearly and must distinguish between matters within the expert's area of expertise and matters outside it.
Where there is a range of opinion on a question, a summary of that range and the reasons for the expert's own view. The expert must not simply assert their own view without acknowledging that other views exist.
A statement of the literature or other material relied upon in forming the opinion. This allows the court and the parties to assess the evidential basis for the opinion and to identify any gaps or limitations.
Any limitations on the expert's opinion, including limitations arising from the information available, the methodology used, or the expert's own area of expertise. An expert must not overstate the certainty of their opinion.
A clear summary of the conclusions reached. The summary must be consistent with the body of the report and must not introduce new material or opinions not addressed in the body.
A statement that the expert understands their overriding duty to the court under FPR Rule 25.3, that they have complied with that duty, and that the report has been prepared in accordance with FPR Part 25 and Practice Direction 25B.
A statement that the expert is aware of the requirements of FPR Part 25 and Practice Direction 25B. Without this statement, the report may be challenged as non-compliant.
The expert's signature and the date on which the report was completed. Where the report has been amended or supplemented, each version must be separately signed and dated.
Section 13(6) of the Children and Families Act 2014 provides that in children proceedings, the court may give permission for expert evidence only if it is necessary to assist the court to resolve the proceedings. The word 'necessary' is deliberately stronger than 'desirable' or 'helpful'. The court in Re H-L (Expert Evidence: Behavioural Genetics) [2021] EWCA Civ 1913 confirmed that the necessity test requires the court to ask whether the proceedings can be resolved without the expert evidence — if they can, permission will be refused.
In practice, the court will grant permission where the issue is genuinely complex and outside the knowledge of a lay tribunal. Parenting capacity assessments, psychiatric assessments for fitness to care, psychological assessments in cases involving domestic abuse or coercive control, and hair strand drug and alcohol testing are all types of expert evidence that routinely satisfy the necessity test. The court will refuse permission where the issue can be resolved on the factual evidence alone, or where the expert evidence would duplicate evidence already available from a treating clinician.
Practical Tip: Apply for Permission Early
The application for permission should be made at the first hearing or case management conference. A late application risks disrupting the timetable and may be refused on that ground alone, even where the expert evidence is otherwise necessary. Expert Witness UK can provide a CV and fee estimate for the court's consideration at the permission hearing.
The court in family proceedings frequently directs the use of a single joint expert (SJE) rather than allowing each party to instruct their own expert. This is particularly common in public law children proceedings, where the cost and delay of competing experts is contrary to the interests of the child and the 26-week timetable.
Where the court directs a single joint expert, the parties must agree the letter of instruction. If the parties cannot agree, the court will settle the letter of instruction at a hearing. Both parties receive the expert's report simultaneously. Both parties have the right to put written questions to the expert under Rule 25.6, and both parties have the right to cross-examine the expert at the final hearing.
The single joint expert's duty is to the court, not to either party. The SJE must not communicate privately with one party about the substance of the case without the knowledge of the other party. Where a party attempts to influence the SJE's opinion outside the agreed process, the court may draw adverse inferences and may make a costs order.
The three procedural frameworks share a common foundation — the overriding duty to the court — but differ significantly in their permission requirements, legal tests, and timetable constraints.
| Aspect | Criminal (CrimPR 19) | Family (FPR 25) | Civil (CPR 35) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Governing Rules | CrimPR Rule 19 | FPR Part 25 + PD 25B | CPR Part 35 + PD 35 |
| Court Permission | Not required as of right | Always required (necessity test) | Required in some courts |
| Legal Test | Relevant and admissible | Necessary (s.13(6) CFA 2014) | Reasonably required |
| Single Joint Expert | Rare — parties usually instruct separately | Common — court frequently directs SJE | Common in fast track |
| Timetable | Court timetable (no statutory limit) | 26-week limit (care proceedings) | Court timetable |
| Overriding Duty | Rule 19.2 — duty to the court | Rule 25.3 — duty to the court | Part 35.3 — duty to the court |
| Report Declaration | Rule 19.4(i) declaration required | PD 25B declaration required | Part 35.10 declaration required |
| Joint Statements | Rule 19.6 — directed by court | PD 25E — directed by court | Part 35.12 — directed by court |
Section 32 of the Children Act 1989 (as amended by the Children and Families Act 2014) requires care and supervision proceedings to be completed within 26 weeks of the application being issued. This statutory timetable has a direct impact on the instruction of expert witnesses.
The court will set a tight timetable for the expert's report — typically 6 to 8 weeks from the date of instruction. The expert must be available to complete the assessment and produce the report within this window. Where an expert cannot meet the timetable, the court may refuse permission or direct the instruction of a different expert.
Expert Witness UK provides a timetable commitment for all family proceedings instructions. Where the court sets a specific deadline for the expert's report, the case manager confirms the expert's availability before the instruction is accepted. This ensures the 26-week timetable is met and the proceedings are not delayed by expert availability issues.
Expert Witness UK provides psychologists, psychiatrists, and other specialists for family proceedings. All experts are vetted for FPR Part 25 compliance and timetable availability is confirmed before instruction.