Part 9 of a 10-part series for clients navigating a dispute before the DIFC Courts or in DIAC arbitration.
In both DIFC Court proceedings and DIAC arbitration, the Court or tribunal will often direct — or the parties may agree — that experts of the same discipline meet, discuss the issues, and try to narrow their areas of disagreement before a hearing.
How these meetings work
These discussions are generally conducted expert-to-expert, without lawyers or clients present. They typically result in a joint statement or memorandum recording:
- The matters the experts agree on, and why
- The matters that remain in dispute, and the reasons for the continuing disagreement
Scott Schedules
In construction and quantum disputes especially, this narrowing exercise is frequently recorded in a Scott Schedule — a table setting out each disputed item (a claimed defect, a variation, a cost item) with each party's position, and often each expert's opinion, laid out side by side against it.
A well-prepared Scott Schedule can turn a sprawling, hard-to-follow claim into something a Court or tribunal — and you — can actually navigate at a glance.
Your role (and why it's a light one)
As the client, resist the temptation to attend, direct, or try to influence these expert-to-expert discussions, or to instruct your expert on what they must or must not agree to.
This is easier said than done, especially when the stakes feel high. But doing so is likely to be viewed dimly by the Court or tribunal, and it undermines the entire point of the exercise — which is to get an independent, expert-led view of what's genuinely still in dispute, free of party pressure on either side.
Next: Part 10 — Tribunal-Appointed Experts, Fees, and the Advocacy Trap.