Cases - H v Schering Chemicals Ltd

Record details

Name

H v Schering Chemicals Ltd

Date

[1983]

Citation

1 WLR 143, QBD

Keywords

Expert witness

Summary

In an action concerning alleged injury caused by a drug manufactured by the defendant company, the judge considered the validity and value of a body of literature including research reports, articles and letters in medical journals and other documents. The defendants sought to have them excluded.

'These articles can be referred to by experts as part of the general corpus of medical knowledge falling within the expertise of an expert in this field. That of course means that an expert ... can fortify his opinion by referring to learned articles, publications, letters as reinforcing the view to which he has come. In doing so, he can make reference to papers in which a contrary opinion may be expressed but in which figures are set out which he regards as supporting his contention. In such a situation one asks: Are the figures and statistics set out in such an article strictly proved? and I think the answer is no. I think they are nonetheless of probative value when referred to and relied upon by an expert in the manner in which I have indicated. If an expert refers to the results of research published by a reputable authority in a reputable journal the court would, I think, ordinarily regard those results as supporting inferences fairly to be drawn from them, unless or until a different approach was shown to be proper.'

There will often be questions raised by the research and views contained in the material, which

'... will fall to be considered and assessed when they are made and put to and discussed with any expert who relies on the articles. It may be that some of the answers will be found in the papers themselves. It may be that other matters will be left in doubt. It may very well be that grounds will emerge for viewing the results of the research with caution or scepticism. But in my judgement the proper approach of the court is to admit the articles, in the sense of reading them, and to give the factual assertions in those articles such weight as appears to the court, having heard any cross-examination or other evidence, to be proper'.