Hamlyn v Stanton [2020] NSWDC 634

Hamlyn v Stanton [2020] NSWDC 634

Professor Turner’s evidence was admissible as it was relevant, the result of the application of specialised knowledge, and satisfied the basis rule despite some opacity in reasoning and reliance on the 2018 Position Statement.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome
Objections to admission of Professor Turner's expert evidence overruled; evidence admitted.
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'relevance of Opinion' 'basis Rule']
['evidence' 'medical Negligence'] ['expert Evidence' 'relevance of Opinion' 'basis Rule']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil / Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Professor Turner's expert opinion evidence is admissible" 'Whether her opinion is wholly or substantially based on specialised knowledge' 'Whether her opinion is relevant to facts in issue' "Application of 'basis rule' to expert medical evidence"]

Ratio Decidendi

Professor Turner’s evidence was admissible as it was relevant, the result of the application of specialised knowledge, and satisfied the basis rule despite some opacity in reasoning and reliance on the 2018 Position Statement.

Court Disposition

Objections to admission of Professor Turner's expert evidence overruled; evidence admitted.

Orders

  • ["Professor Turner's report (excluding sentence regarding urologist’s 'inherent financial conflict') admitted as expert evidence."]