In 2025, a seismic shift is unfolding in Personal Injury Litigation as Latin America Courts increasingly embrace Single Joint Experts (SJE) to streamline Court Procedures, enhance the reliability of expert input, and accelerate resolution. This Legal Transformation is tracked by a growing body of Global Law Firm Insights about how cross-border practices are reshaping civil justice, with a sharper focus on Judicial Reform and the role of Expert Witnesses in complex PI claims. See how these trends connect to broader Cross-Border Legal Practices and the pursuit of more efficient, fair outcomes for plaintiffs and defendants alike.
Latin America Courts embrace Single Joint Experts to reform Personal Injury Litigation
The movement toward Single Joint Experts seeks to replace the traditional model where each party hires separate medical or engineering specialists. In PI cases, the SJEs prepare a single, joint assessment that informs the court about the cause, extent, and impact of injuries, helping judges focus on the true questions at stake rather than wrestling with competing narratives.
- What SJEs are: a single, independent expert appointed to prepare one comprehensive report for both sides.
- Why it matters: reduces conflict between competing expert opinions, shortens timelines, and improves the credibility of damage assessments.
- Courts’ criteria: cost-effectiveness, proportionality of the claim, and facilitation of dispute resolution.
Across Latin America, practitioners are citing advantages in terms of cost-effectiveness and faster case progression, aligning with broader Litigation Innovation goals. To see the global context, consider how courts in other jurisdictions have adopted SJEs to streamline proceedings and reduce unnecessary litigation frictions. For further context on related trends in PI, explore related discussions in sources like Product Liability and Mass Tort insights and other local PI law office analyses.
In practice, a move toward SJE reflects a strategic shift in Court Procedures toward more predictable, objective decision-making. As noted in cross-jurisdictional analyses, SI ensue in a fairer allocation of costs and a more transparent pathway to settlement, particularly in straightforward PI disputes where complex medical conclusions may otherwise obscure the merits of the claim. See this comparative framing in related personal injury rulings and analyses of how courts are balancing access to justice with procedural efficiency.
Lessons from global jurisdictions and implications for Latin America
Global jurisprudence provides a template for the practical benefits of SJEs. A notable 2023 decision from Hong Kong highlighted the value of reducing polarised expert positions in PI cases and advocated the wider use of SJEs in straightforward disputes to support the Civil Justice Reform agenda. While the Rai Chandra Kala case is not in Latin America, its reasoning resonates with Judicial Reform aims and the pursuit of clearer, more cost-effective expert evidence in Latin America Courts.
- Cost-effectiveness: a single expert’s report generally costs less than two separate reports, and a joint medical report can avoid duplicative expenses.
- Proportionality: in less complex PI claims, SJEs align with the principle that the process should reflect the scale of the dispute.
- Settlement facilitation: objective, unified opinions can reduce litigation hostility and encourage negotiated outcomes.
Practical implications for Cross-Border Legal Practices include harmonizing standards for SJE selection, ensuring transparent appointment processes, and adopting standard directions to guide courts when agreement on an SJE cannot be reached. The broader aim is to synchronize Latin American PI practices with established SJEs norms used in other common law systems, while respecting local legal cultures. For context on evolving patterns, see discussions of Supreme Court and appellate developments in PI, including how courts address RICO damages and other complex issues across jurisdictions: RICO damages in PI cases, inquiries limits in PI, and trucker ruling.
Latin American practitioners should also watch for Global Law Firm Insights on best practices for implementing SJEs, including processes for nomination, court-directed appointment, and handling related questions when a JMR (joint medical report) has already been produced in related proceedings. When parties cannot agree, the court may appoint an SJE from a nominated list or adopt an existing JMR where appropriate, a model that can help streamline cross-border cases that traverse multiple jurisdictions.
Implementing Single Joint Experts in PI proceedings: practical steps for practitioners
To operationalize SJEs in Personal Injury Litigation in Latin America, practitioners can follow a practical framework:
- Step 1: Seek agreement on a single joint expert by consensus between the parties.
- Step 2: If agreement fails, submit nominations to the PI master and request appointment of an SJE from the list provided.
- Step 3: Consider existing JMRs from related proceedings and determine whether to adopt or replace them with a new SJE assessment.
- Step 4: Align with district court thresholds where the jurisdiction supports simplified procedures for PI claims, recognizing the growing district court role in PI adjudication.
- Step 5: Focus on proportionality by tailoring the reach of the SJE to the magnitude of the claim and the complexity of injuries.
- Step 6: Safeguard objectivity to avoid a “hired gun” dynamic by selecting independent experts with recognized credentials and a track record of impartial reporting.
These steps contribute to a more predictable, fair, and efficient path to resolution, reinforcing the notion that Litigation Innovation should serve both plaintiffs and defendants. For broader context on related PI trends and evolving rules, review the following resources: Texas negligence claims, awards in injury cases, and new PI firm insights.
Cross-border impact: how Latin America Courts can lead global reforms
The adoption of SJEs in Latin America could set a regional standard that other jurisdictions may emulate, strengthening Cross-Border Legal Practices as practitioners navigate harmonized procedural expectations while respecting local legislative frameworks. In this evolving landscape, Judicial Reform and Court Procedures will require ongoing training for judges, counsel, and expert witnesses to ensure consistency, fairness, and efficiency across cases that cross borders. For deeper dives into related developments in PI, see:
- RICO damages and PI
- owner liability and inquiries
- appeals courts reviving tort claims
- Charlotte PI claims
- Global Law Firm Insights: PI practice
To illustrate the practical realities of this transformation, consider how a Global Law Firm perspective on Personal Injury Litigation in the Latin American context emphasizes the need for standardized SJE processes, robust nomination procedures, and transparent court-directed directions. This approach aligns with the broader objective of improving access to justice while maintaining rigorous scientific and medical appraisal standards. For ongoing updates, explore the latest analyses on related topics and ongoing reforms in the field: economic damages and RICO, RICO in specific PI cases, and settlement challenges in PI.
FAQ
What is a Single Joint Expert (SJE) in Personal Injury Litigation? An SJE is a neutral expert appointed once to prepare a single, joint report for both sides, rather than two separate reports from opposing experts.
Why are SJEs being adopted in Latin America? To improve cost-effectiveness, proportionality, and the likelihood of settlement, while ensuring higher quality medical and technical input for court decisions.
How should practitioners implement SJEs in PI claims? Start with an agreement on the SJE, or file a nomination list with the PI master for appointment; consider adopting an existing JMR when appropriate and ensure the process remains proportional to the claim value.
What about cross-border cases? Establish harmonized standards for SJE appointment, reporting, and admissibility to facilitate consistent handling of PI matters across borders, while respecting local laws and practices.
Where can I find more analyses on PI trends and SJE adoption? See the following resources for broader context: Court awards and injuries, PI legal rulings, RICO damages in PI cases, inquiries in PI cases.