A jury is not bound to accept a plaintiff's case on causation even where lay evidence of complaints is unchallenged in cross-examination, where the respondent's case rests on the absence of contemporaneous medical complaints and contrary expert evidence. The failure to cross-examine on specific matters does not compel the jury to accept the unchallenged evidence where the overall forensic strategy is to assert that causation is not established on the totality of the evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.