In the US, it has become common to assess expert evidence at “certification” stage in class actions. A question has been raised as to whether this applies both to the ‘rigoressness’ and the admissibility of such evidence.
The phrase “we doubt that this is so” by the US Supreme Court has become the focus of some debate, as can be seen from an article in the National Law Review:
“This is just one in a growing line of cases that address the propriety of a Daubert review at the class certification stage, a country-wide discussion following the cryptic message handed down from the Supreme Court in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011): “The District Court concluded that Daubert did not apply to expert testimony at the certification stage of class-action proceedings. We doubt that is so.”
The meaning of “we doubt that is so” has been addressed in several circuits, with most favoring such a review. One circuit, the Eighth, held a Daubert review at the certification stage is unnecessary, apparently seeing “we doubt that is so” as a casual remark.”
To see the full article from the National Law Review: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/big-tuna-antitrust-case-among-latest-to-discuss-daubert-test-class-certification