Where a trial judge finds an applicant for leave to bring common law proceedings lacks credibility, and the applicant's lack of credibility relates to the same matters that were the subject of her history to medical experts, the trial judge is entitled to prefer a minority expert opinion over the preponderance of expert evidence, because the majority opinions are based on a false premise. This is distinguishable from Forder v Hutchinson, where objective evidence existed independent of the applicant's credibility.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 21 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 21 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.