Van Wyk v Terence Lind t/a Auto Exec (1697 of 2015) [2017] NAHCMD 144 (17 May 2017)

Van Wyk v Terence Lind t/a Auto Exec (1697 of 2015) [2017] NAHCMD 144 (17 May 2017)

The concept of market value or replacement value is not exclusively within the realm of experts; lay opinion evidence is admissible if reasons are provided, affecting weight but not admissibility.

Citation
[2017] NAHCMD 144
Parties
Plaintiff: Johan van Wyk; Defendant: Terence Lind t/a Auto Exec
Court
High Court Main Division
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
17 May 2017
Case Number
1697 of 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Interlocutory Ruling on Evidentiary Objection
Outcome
Objection dismissed; lay opinion evidence admissible.
Legal Topics
Opinion Evidence, Lay Opinion, Expert Evidence, Market Value, Replacement Value
Source Language
English
Evidence Opinion Evidence Lay Opinion Expert Evidence Market Value Replacement Value

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Johan van Wyk

Plaintiff

Terence Lind t/a Auto Exec

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Interlocutory Ruling on Evidentiary Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether lay opinion evidence on market value or replacement value is admissible
  2. 2 Whether expert evidence is required for market value determination

Ratio Decidendi

The concept of market value or replacement value is not exclusively within the realm of experts; lay opinion evidence is admissible if reasons are provided, affecting weight but not admissibility.

Court Disposition

Objection dismissed; lay opinion evidence admissible.

Orders

  • Objection is dismissed.
  • Plaintiff may give lay opinion evidence on market value or replacement value of equipment.