Suttram Pty Limited v Michelin Australia Pty Limited (No 3) [2008] NSWDC 233

Suttram Pty Limited v Michelin Australia Pty Limited (No 3) [2008] NSWDC 233

The reports of Mr Herzog are admissible because he has sufficient specialised knowledge and experience in tyres and tyre failure, the opinions expressed are based on that expertise, the reports are relevant and have probative value, and any issues regarding articulation of reasons, relevance of certain passages, or argumentativeness go to weight rather than admissibility. The objections under s 76, s 79, and s 135 of the Evidence Act 1995 are not upheld.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil / Ruling on Evidentiary Objections
Outcome
Reports admitted into evidence
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Expert Reports' 'opinion Rule' 'specialised Knowledge' 'probative Value' 'relevance']
['evidence'] ['admissibility of Expert Reports' 'opinion Rule' 'specialised Knowledge' 'probative Value' 'relevance']

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

Civil / Ruling on Evidentiary Objections

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the reports of Mr Herzog are admissible under the opinion rule and sections 76, 79 and 135 of the Evidence Act 1995.']

Ratio Decidendi

The reports of Mr Herzog are admissible because he has sufficient specialised knowledge and experience in tyres and tyre failure, the opinions expressed are based on that expertise, the reports are relevant and have probative value, and any issues regarding articulation of reasons, relevance of certain passages, or argumentativeness go to weight rather than admissibility. The objections under s 76, s 79, and s 135 of the Evidence Act 1995 are not upheld.

Court Disposition

Reports admitted into evidence

Orders

  • ['The reports of Mr Herzog dated 24 July 2007 (exhibit VDK2), 31 May 2007 (exhibit VDJ2), 23 May 2008 (exhibit VDL1), and 7 October 2008 (exhibit VDM) are admitted into evidence in the proceedings.']