29 October 2024 Sean Mosby 153 Case Updates Pfizer Inc v Uniqure Biopharma BV [2024] EWHC 2672 (Pat) bySean Mosby Summary The judge in this patent case found that the claimants’ gene therapy expert had developed, quite possibly guided by lawyers, the understanding that the primary duty of an expert witness is not to say anything that may damage the instructing party’s case if it can be avoided. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the Judgment Share Print Tags 05. Rules and Regulations10. Report Writing07. Working with Instructing Parties14. Giving Oral Evidence15. Criticism and Complaints Related articles Preliminary (pre-report) experts’ meetings A Day in the Life of a Medicolegal Expert Witness Solicitors Regulation Authority Ltd v Khan & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 531 How not to use AI in expert evidence Steven Wilson v Ministry of Justice [2024] EWHC 2389 (KB) Switch article How not to use AI in expert evidence Previous Article Thomas Murray Joins EWI as a Corporate Partner Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.