Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia
McNickle v Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd (Additional Expert Conclave) [2022] FCA 1596 File number: VID 243 of 2020
Judgment of: LEE J
Date of judgment: 9 December 2022
Date of publication of reasons: 10 January 2023
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – expert evidence – expert opinion evidence on the reliability of underlying data of scientific journal articles – reliability of expert opinions for the purpose of assessing the weight of scientific journal articles – whether opinion evidence admissible
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) Pt 3.3, ss 76(1), 79, 140(2), 190 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (US) 28 USC § 1782
Cases cited: Allstate Life Insurance Co v Australia & New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (No 5) (Allstate Judgment No 32) (1996) 64 FCR 73 Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar [2011] HCA 21; (2011) 243 CLR 588 Honeysett v The Queen [2014] HCA 29; (2014) 253 CLR 122 Karpik v Carnival plc (The Ruby Princess) (Evidential Ruling) [2022] FCA 1318 McNickle v Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd (Assessors) [2021] FCA 780; (2021) 285 FCR 244 McNickle v Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd (Expert Evidence) [2021] FCA 370 McNickle v Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd (Hearing Vacation) [2022] FCA 133 Rhoden v Wingate [2002] NSWCA 165; (2002) 36 MVR 499
Heydon KC, John Dyson, "Evidence of Forensic Scientific Opinion and the Rules of Admissibility" (2015) 36 Adelaide Law Review 101
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