Description
Expert Evidence. In proceedings against a general practitioner who had not diagnosed a condition by questions over the telephone, experts for both parties had agreed that the use of "open" questions was sufficient. The trial judge rejected both experts' evidence and found liability on the basis that "closed" questions should have been used to elicit further details about the child's medical history. The judge should have done one or both of two things: to ask the claimant's counsel whether, should his findings reach the position that he found the joint expert evidence as to general medical practice unacceptable, he should consider the credibility of the expert evidence in support of the doctor; and if, claimant's counsel said yes, to ensure that the defendant's side had a proper opportunity to respond.
