Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
McNickle v Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd (Expert Evidence) [2021] FCA 370 File number: VID 243 of 2020
Judgment of: LEE J
Date of judgment: 11 March 2021
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – class action concerning the alleged carcinogenic effects of Roundup – allegation that scientific opinion skewed or manipulated by respondent – no referee appointed – consideration of methods for adducing expert evidence – expert evidence to be adduced in ordinary way – orders made to safeguard the impartiality of experts – whether orders unfair on respondent – applicant's experts prior involvement in similar proceedings – respondents' intention to object to evidence of experts nominated by applicant – whether applicant's experts bring "entrenched and already expressed opinions" or are likely to "express opinions in the same or similar terms to the opinions they have already expressed" – whether advance ruling appropriate pursuant to s 192A of Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – opposed by applicant – whether perceived lack of independence and impartiality goes to issues of admissibility or simply weight – inappropriate to proceed to advance ruling when not embraced by both parties
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 135, 192A Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 33ZF, 37P Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 23.15 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) r 31.24
Explanatory Memorandum, Evidence Amendment Bill 2008 (Cth)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate