Regulation 4

be signed by the expert;

state that the expert’s report was prepared by and sets out the opinion of the expert and that the expert accepts full responsibility for the report;

give details of the expert’s qualifications and any relevant experience;

give details of any literature or other material that the expert relied on in making the expert’s report;

set out the issues that the expert has been asked to consider and the facts that the expert relied on in making the expert’s report;

if applicable, state the name and qualifications of the person who carried out any test or experiment that the expert has used for the expert’s report, and whether such test or experiment has been carried out under the expert’s supervision;

where there is a range of opinion on the matters dealt with in the expert’s report, contain a summary of the range of opinion that is known to the expert;

state the conclusion reached on the issues set out in sub‑paragraph (e) and the reasons supporting the conclusion;

contain a statement of belief of correctness of the expert’s opinion;

contain a statement that the expert understands the expert’s duty in rule 3, and that in giving the expert’s report, the expert has complied, and will continue to comply, with the expert’s duty in that rule; and

disclose any personal relationship between the expert and any person connected to the proceedings in which the expert’s report is provided, which may cause a conflict between the expert’s interests and the expert’s duty to the court.

state whether a person whose psychiatric condition is assessed by the expert (called in this paragraph the subject) was interviewed by the expert, and if the subject was interviewed by the expert, state —

the number of interviews and the date of each interview; and

the language in which each interview was conducted (and whether the interview was conducted through an interpreter);

state whether any person apart from the subject was interviewed by the expert, and if any such person was interviewed by the expert, state —

the person’s identity and relationship to the subject;

the number of interviews and the date of each interview; and

the language in which each interview with the person was conducted (and whether the interview was conducted through an interpreter);

state whether the expert diagnosed the subject as suffering from a psychiatric disorder, and if so, state —

what the psychiatric disorder is;

when the subject suffered from the psychiatric disorder (such as at the time of the alleged offence, the time of diagnosis or any other time, whichever is relevant);

the basis for the diagnosis, including the diagnostic criteria or test applied or relied on (if any), and the result and report (if any) obtained after the application of the criteria or test to the subject; and

the nature and severity of the psychiatric disorder, including the basis for this assessment;

where the expert diagnosed the subject as not suffering from a psychiatric disorder, state the basis for this diagnosis;

state whether the expert was given a copy of another psychiatrist’s expert report on the subject, and if so, for each report on the subject by another psychiatrist, state each part of that report that the expert agrees with and each part of that report that the expert disagrees with, and provide reasons for each agreement and each disagreement;

state whether the expert was a member of the Panel when the expert’s report was made; and

state the source of each material fact that the expert relied on in making the expert’s report.

if at least one of the experts is a psychiatrist — comply with the requirements in paragraph (3);

if 2 or more of the experts are psychiatrists — state, in relation to each interview mentioned in paragraph (3)(a) and (b), which psychiatrist conducted which interview; and

be signed by all the experts who prepared the report.