A trial judge who rejects expert evidence based on objective physical analysis in favour of lay witness testimony must provide a coherent reasoned rebuttal of the expert's analysis; cursory dismissal of such evidence, particularly where the expert's objectivity is unchallenged, constitutes a miscarriage of justice warranting a new trial. The mere acceptance of competing lay witness evidence does not discharge the obligation to rationally engage with expert evidence based on objective physical evidence.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.