A report was prepared by various analysts employed by the defendant Hospital following a post-mortem examination of a deceased child. It said that organs of the child contained various concentrations of morphine. The result was reported to the police in the form of a statement and formed the basis of a prosecution of the mother. However, at the trial no evidence was presented as it appeared the analysis was contaminated. The mother now sued the hospital and the analysts claiming negligence in, amongst other things permitting the organs to become contaminated, not appreciating the high likelihood of contamination and not retracting their reports subsequently.
Held: Common law immunity is to be given to evidence from potential witnesses in criminal proceedings at a time when proceedings are in contemplation but have not yet been commenced.
Judges:
Drake J
Citations:
[1981] 1 WLR 184, [1981] 1 All ER 715
Cited by:
Cited – General Medical Council v Professor Sir Roy Meadow, Attorney General CA 26-Oct-2006
The GMC appealed against the dismissal of its proceedings for professional misconduct against the respondent doctor, whose expert evidence to a criminal court was the subject of complaint. The doctor said that the evidence given by him was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.245745
