A trial judge who intervenes extensively in expert witness evidence, introduces material beyond the scope of an expert's report, puts that material to the opposing expert, and criticises defence counsel before the jury risks causing a substantial miscarriage of justice, particularly where the expert evidence goes to the central issue in the trial. The court recommended that judges defer questions to the conclusion of all counsel's questioning and, if the question remains unanswered, ask in as neutral a form as possible.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.