Composites Expert Witness

Independent opinion on failures of fibre-reinforced and hybrid materials, where the interface and the process matter as much as the constituents.

Disputes this covers

  • Product liability — a composite structure or component delaminated, cracked or lost stiffness in service.
  • Manufacturing and supply disputes — whether a laminate, moulding or pultruded section was made to specification, and whether cure, fibre content or lay-up departed from it.
  • Intellectual property — composite and nanocomposite formulations, reinforcement systems and processing methods.
  • Insurance and subrogation — losses involving FRP or GRP tanks, pipe, panels and structures.

Start with a conflict check. Send the party names and the technical subject matter only. Do not send case details, documents, samples or privileged material before an engagement agreement is in place.

Request a confidential conflict check →

The technical questions that usually decide the matter

  • Did failure start in the fibre, in the matrix, or at the interface between them?
  • Was the resin fully cured, and was the fibre content and orientation what the design required?
  • Are voids, dry fibre or resin-rich regions present, and do they coincide with the origin of the failure?
  • Did moisture, chemicals, heat or ultraviolet exposure degrade the matrix or the bond over time?
  • Was the damage caused by a single overload or impact, or by fatigue and creep over the service life?

Why this sits inside the principal’s field

Nanocomposites and organic–inorganic hybrid materials are a direct research specialism of the principal, alongside carbon and aramid fibre composites, FRP and GRP. Fibre–matrix debonding, delamination and interface failure are the mechanisms most composite disputes turn on, and they are the ones a jury most needs explained plainly.

Credentials relevant to admissibility

  • PhD in polymer science and engineering, University of Manchester (UMIST), England.
  • Professor Emeritus of Polymer Science & Engineering, The University of Southern Mississippi; formerly professor of chemical engineering and of materials science and engineering, Iowa State University.
  • Registered Chartered Engineer (UK) and Registered Chartered Scientist (UK).
  • Fellow of the Institute of Materials, Minerals & Mining (UK), the Society of Plastics Engineers, and the Nigerian Academy of Engineering.
  • Holder of seven patents; author of more than 150 publications in refereed archival scientific and engineering journals and books.
  • Senior industrial experience, including as Senior Project Leader and Engineer at Corning Incorporated.

The full record, including awards and appointments, is set out on the credentials page.

How an engagement runs

Conflicts are cleared first. After an engagement agreement is in place, the evidence is reviewed, any testing is commissioned through independent university and industry laboratories, and the opinion is reported to counsel before it is written up. The scope of expert work, and answers to the questions counsel usually ask first, are on the Expert Witness & Litigation Support page.

Get Clarity Before the Next Costly Decision

A short conversation is usually enough to tell whether independent technical review is worth it — and if it is not, you will be told so.

Manufacturers & product teams

Discuss Your Challenge

Describe what is happening, what it is costing and what decision is waiting on it. You will get a direct assessment of whether and how this can be investigated.

Discuss Your Challenge
Attorneys

Request a Confidential Conflict Check

Send the parties and the technical subject matter only — no case details, no documents. Conflicts are cleared before any substantive discussion takes place.

Request a Conflict Check