Lakatoi Universal Pty Ltd & Ors v Langley Alexander Walker & Ors [1999] NSWSC 1336

Lakatoi Universal Pty Ltd & Ors v Langley Alexander Walker & Ors [1999] NSWSC 1336

Expert evidence must be based on explicit, stated assumptions and within an expert's demonstrated area of specialised knowledge; evidence is inadmissible if these requirements are not satisfied or if its probative value is outweighed by the potential for unfair prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Judgment on Expert Evidence / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Outcome
Evidence allowed in part
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'admissibility' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure'] ['expert Evidence' 'admissibility' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Judgment on Expert Evidence / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Requirements for admissibility of expert evidence under Evidence Act 1995' 'Whether expert evidence must be within relevant field of expertise and based on stated assumptions' "Court's discretion to reject expert evidence for unfair prejudice"]

Ratio Decidendi

Expert evidence must be based on explicit, stated assumptions and within an expert's demonstrated area of specialised knowledge; evidence is inadmissible if these requirements are not satisfied or if its probative value is outweighed by the potential for unfair prejudice, confusion, or waste of time.

Court Disposition

Evidence allowed in part

Orders

  • ['First sentence of paragraph 4.2 rejected.' 'Second sentence of paragraph 4.2 allowed.' 'Third sentence of paragraph 4.2 rejected.' "So much of the final sentence of paragraph 4.2 as commences with 'and increase' is rejected; balance allowed." 'First sentence of paragraph 14.18 allowed; second sentence rejected;...