29 October 2024 Sean Mosby 1101 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 06. Rules and Regulations11. Report Writing08. Working with Instructing Parties15. Giving Oral Evidence16. Criticism and Complaints Related articles Andrew Cannestra v Mclaren Automotive Events Limited [2025] EWHC 1844 (KB) The Criminal Procedure Rules 2025 A fundamentally flawed report Expert evidence and the materiality of a risk Podcast Episode 14: Reflections on the EWI Annual Conference 2025 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.