Expert witnesses in the UK are regulated in two separate ways at once. Doctors and other healthcare professionals answer to their own professional regulator, the GMC for doctors, the HCPC for professions like psychology, for how they conduct themselves in legal work. On top of that, membership bodies such as the Expert Witness Institute hold their own members to a shared code of conduct, with the power to remove anyone who breaches it.
Neither of these replaces the court’s own rules on expert evidence. CPR Part 35 governs what a report must contain and how an expert must behave once instructed in a civil case. Regulation is a separate, ongoing question: whether the person is fit to hold themselves out as an expert at all.
In short: a doctor acting as an expert witness must follow GMC guidance built on Good Medical Practice, alongside any code from their relevant professional body. Falling short can lead to a GMC fitness to practise investigation, up to and including erasure from the register, regardless of what any individual court case decides.
Prof. Sandip Hindocha, a Consultant Plastic Surgeon and the UK’s National Lead Forensic Medical Examiner, holds GMC registration in good standing and practises expert witness work in line with this guidance throughout.
What the GMC Actually Requires of Doctors
The GMC’s guidance on this, Providing Witness Statements or Expert Evidence as Part of Legal Proceedings, took effect in January 2024 and builds directly on Good Medical Practice. It sets out ten principles that apply to any doctor acting as a witness, whether as an expert or simply giving evidence of fact.
The core ones are integrity, honesty and objectivity in whatever role is being carried out, accuracy in any statement or report, and a clear separation between what’s factual evidence and what’s professional opinion. A doctor must also stay within their actual area of competence and say so plainly when a question falls outside it.
The Duty to the Court Comes First
For expert witnesses specifically, the guidance is stricter still. A doctor’s duty to the court overrides any obligation to whoever instructed or is paying them. That’s not just a courtesy, it’s a professional requirement enforced by the regulator, not only a rule of civil procedure.
Before accepting instruction, a doctor must also honestly assess whether they have the knowledge, training and experience the case actually needs, and must disclose any personal or professional conflict of interest to the instructing party in writing before continuing.
Insurance and Indemnity Are Part of the Standard
The GMC also expects a doctor’s indemnity or insurance to specifically cover expert witness work, not just their clinical practice. A doctor who only holds cover for treating patients isn’t meeting the regulator’s standard once they take on medico-legal reporting.
What Happens If a Doctor Falls Short
Breaching these standards isn’t just a problem for the case in question, it can trigger a GMC fitness to practise investigation, run through the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service, entirely separate from anything the court itself decides.
The consequences can be severe. In General Medical Council v Zafar [2020] EWHC 846, a GP who had been producing large volumes of rushed, inaccurate personal injury reports was found to have acted dishonestly and was in contempt of court. A tribunal initially suspended him for twelve months, but the High Court substituted erasure from the medical register, finding that his conduct struck at the heart of how the justice system relies on expert evidence.
How Other Registered Professionals Are Regulated
Doctors aren’t the only expert witnesses subject to professional regulation. Psychologists and several other health professions are registered with the HCPC, which expects members taking on expert witness work to stay within their registered scope of practice, undertake relevant training, and maintain the CPD needed to do the role competently.
The detail differs by profession, but the underlying principle is the same across every regulator: acting as an expert witness doesn’t sit outside a professional’s normal standards of conduct, it sits squarely within them.
Membership Bodies Add a Further Layer
Alongside statutory regulation, bodies like the Expert Witness Institute and the Academy of Experts operate a joint Code of Practice that members agree to on joining. It requires independence, impartiality and integrity, and compliance with whatever code the member’s own profession already imposes.
This is membership regulation rather than statutory regulation, the sanction for a serious breach is removal from the institute, not action against a professional licence. But it functions as a visible, additional signal to instructing solicitors that a given expert has agreed to be held to a recognised standard.
Regulation vs CPR Part 35 Compliance
It’s easy to conflate professional regulation with procedural compliance, but they answer different questions. Regulation asks whether someone is fit to act as an expert at all. CPR Part 35 asks whether a specific report, once that person has been instructed, meets the court’s requirements for content and conduct.
| Professional Regulation | CPR Part 35 | |
|---|---|---|
| Who enforces it | GMC, HCPC, or equivalent regulator | The court, in the specific case |
| What it governs | Fitness to practise as an expert generally | Conduct and content within one case |
| Consequence of failure | Investigation, sanctions, up to erasure | Report rejected or given less weight |
| Applies to | The professional, ongoing | The instruction, case by case |
A doctor can meet every GMC principle and still produce a report that falls short of CPR Part 35, or vice versa. Solicitors instructing an expert generally want assurance on both.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does the GMC regulate expert witness work specifically? Yes. Since January 2024, the GMC’s guidance on providing witness statements or expert evidence sets out specific responsibilities for doctors acting as expert witnesses, on top of the general principles in Good Medical Practice.
Can a doctor lose their licence over expert witness work? Yes. If conduct in expert witness work is serious enough, it can lead to a full GMC fitness to practise investigation and, in the most serious cases, erasure from the medical register, as happened in General Medical Council v Zafar.
Is CPR Part 35 the same as GMC regulation? No. CPR Part 35 governs how an expert must behave and what a report must contain within a specific legal case. GMC regulation is a separate, ongoing question about whether a doctor is fit to act as an expert at all.
Do non-medical expert witnesses have their own regulator? Often, yes. Professionals such as psychologists are regulated by the HCPC, which sets similar expectations around competence, training and scope of practice for expert witness work.
Does membership of a body like the Expert Witness Institute mean an expert is regulated? It adds a further, voluntary layer, a shared code of conduct with its own complaints process, but it sits alongside statutory regulation rather than replacing it.
Prof. Hindocha prepares expert reports and gives evidence in accordance with GMC guidance and CPR Part 35 for solicitors, insurers, and courts across the UK. Details of his expert witness services and how to instruct him are on the instruction page.
This article is general information about how expert witnesses are regulated in the UK and is not a substitute for legal or professional advice on a specific case.