Kabic v Workers Compensation Nominal Insurer (No 2) [2016] NSWSC 1711
The entirety of the pressed portions of the expert report was admitted because the expert's qualifications and experience sufficed to establish admissibility under Evidence Act s 79, the reasoning for opinions was adequately revealed or based on common knowledge, and objections regarding relevance or insufficient linkage to statutory extracts did not warrant exclusion.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 05 December 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Personal Injury Litigation / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Report
- Outcome
- Report admitted, subject to agreed limitation.
- Legal Topics
- ['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'personal Injury' 'workplace Safety']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Litigation / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Report
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the expert report of Mr Ian Burn is admissible.' "Whether opinions within the report are relevant and based on the expert's training, study, or experience." 'Whether the report adequately sets out the reasoning for the opinions expressed.']
Ratio Decidendi
The entirety of the pressed portions of the expert report was admitted because the expert's qualifications and experience sufficed to establish admissibility under Evidence Act s 79, the reasoning for opinions was adequately revealed or based on common knowledge, and objections regarding relevance or insufficient linkage to statutory extracts did not warrant exclusion.
Court Disposition
Report admitted, subject to agreed limitation.
Orders
- ['The entirety of the pressed portions of the report of Mr Ian Burn of 22 October 2014 is admitted, subject to the limitation agreed on 12 August 2016.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment