Expert evidence is not rendered inadmissible merely because the witness is materially interested in the proceedings, including where the witness's own conduct is the subject of the negligence claim. Interest, potential bias, and the risk of ex post facto exculpatory justification go to weight, not admissibility. A 10 per cent increase in the risk of metastasisation, combined with evidence that the risk eventuated, can be sufficient to establish causation on the balance of probabilities in a medical negligence case.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 44 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 44 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.