Meadow v General Medical Council
Expert witness immunity from suit for evidence given in court extends to immunity from disciplinary proceedings brought by regulatory bodies, except where a referral is made by the court for conduct falling far below expected standards. Meadow's honest but mistaken use of statistics did not justify a finding of serious professional misconduct.
- Parties
- Appellant: Meadow; Respondent: General Medical Council
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 17 February 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Expert Witness Immunity, Serious Professional Misconduct, Statistical Evidence, Disciplinary Proceedings, Public Policy
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Meadow
Appellant
General Medical Council
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether expert witness immunity from suit extends to immunity from disciplinary proceedings
- 2 Whether Meadow's use of statistics constituted serious professional misconduct
- 3 Appropriate threshold for disciplinary action against expert witnesses
Ratio Decidendi
Expert witness immunity from suit for evidence given in court extends to immunity from disciplinary proceedings brought by regulatory bodies, except where a referral is made by the court for conduct falling far below expected standards. Meadow's honest but mistaken use of statistics did not justify a finding of serious professional misconduct.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed
Orders
- Finding of serious professional misconduct set aside
- Erasure from the register set aside
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment