Rolleston v Insurance Australia Ltd

[2017] NSWCA 168

NSW Court of Appeal

View on CaseLaw

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Evidence
2. › Opinion evidence
3. › Expert opinion
4. › Admissibility under s 79 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
5. › Whether valuation report disclosed valuer's reasoning process
6. › Whether opinion shown to be based on application of specialised knowledge to facts
7. › Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 79
1. Evidence
2. › Discretions to exclude evidence
3. › Civil proceedings
4. › Unfair prejudice
5. › Whether probative value substantially outweighed by danger of unfair prejudice
6. › Failure to expose reasoning process placing opposing party in unfair forensic position
7. › Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), s 135
1. Evidence
2. › Opinion evidence
3. › Expert opinion
4. › Valuation evidence
5. › Comparable sales method
6. › Whether valuer must explain how comparable sales justify conclusion as to value
1. Appeal
2. › General principles
3. › Appeal from rejection of evidence
4. › Whether any utility in remittal for further hearing

Quick Take

A valuation report using the comparable sales method must lay out the reasoning process by which the method was followed and explain how the comparable sales justify the conclusion as to value. It is not sufficient to identify differences and similarities between comparable properties in general terms and then state a value figure. A report that fails to expose the valuer's reasoning process will not satisfy s 79 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and may also be excluded under s 135 as unfairly prejudicial to the opposing party.