Problematic Expert Evidence: Civil, Disciplinary and Court Responses

The Civil Justice Research Group, Melbourne Law School, is hosting a lunchtime seminar on Thursday 11 May 2017. Associate Professor Tina Cockburn and I have been asked to speak on the topic of problematic expert evidence – civil, disciplinary and court responses.

There is no cost to attend but for catering purposes, online registration is required.

Expert witnesses act as ‘injury brokers’ in contributing to the analysis of what qualifies as legally recognised and compensable injury in medical negligence litigation. The orthodox approach in Australia is that expert witnesses, like advocates, are immune from suit in negligence. In Attwells v Jackson Lalic Lawyers Pty Ltd (2016) 90 ALJR 572; [2016] HCA 16, the High Court of Australia upheld, but narrowed, advocates’ immunity. This discussion will focus on whether that recent narrowing of the scope of advocates’ immunity will lead to similar limitations on the scope of expert witness immunity and will address other available responses in the event of problematic expert evidence.


One Reply to “Problematic Expert Evidence: Civil, Disciplinary and Court Responses”

Comments are closed.