Federal Court of Australia
Federal Court of Australia McNickle v Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd (Evidentiary Ruling) [2023] FCA 1268 File number: VID 243 of 2020
Ruling of: LEE J
Date of ruling: 10 October 2023
Date of publication of reasons: 23 October 2023
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – expert opinion evidence – application to exclude opinion evidence pursuant to s 135 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) – where expert alleged to lack independence in giving opinion evidence concerning alleged carcinogenic effects of Roundup weedkiller – where expert has participated in similar litigation in the United States – whether perceived lack of independence goes to admissibility or weight – where unfair prejudice or confusion not established to a degree necessary to enliven discretion to exclude evidence – application refused
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 135, 192, 192A Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) Pt VB
Expert Evidence Practice Note (GPN-EXPT)
Cases: McNickle v Huntsman Chemical Company Australia Pty Ltd (Expert Evidence) [2021] FCA 370 Rush v Nationwide News (No 5) [2018] FCA 1622
Division: General Division
Registry: Victoria
National Practice Area: Commercial and Corporations
Sub-area: Regulator and Consumer Protection
Number of paragraphs: 28
Date of hearing: 10 October 2023
Counsel for the applicant: Mr A Clements KC with Ms M Szydzik SC, Ms R Singleton and Ms R Howe
Solicitor for the applicant: Maurice Blackburn
Counsel for the respondents: Mr R Craig KC with Ms K O'Gorman and Mr R Ajzensztat
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