Hamod v Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd

The appeal concerned a dispute between Mr Hamod and Suncorp Metway Insurance Ltd regarding a claim for a stolen vehicle. Mr Hamod appealed to the Supreme Court of New South Wales from a decision of the Local Court, which had rejected an expert report tendered on his behalf.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the Local Court had erred in rejecting the expert report, and whether such a rejection constituted an appealable error "in point of law" under section 69(2) of the *Local Courts (Civil Claims) Act 1970* (NSW). Central to this was the question of whether the expert possessed the requisite expertise to give evidence concerning the failure of a car's engine immobiliser, and whether their opinion was based on that expertise, rather than on internet research and personal investigations.

The Court of Appeal held that the determination of an expert's qualifications and the admissibility of their evidence under section 79 of the *Evidence Act 1995* (NSW) were questions of fact, not law. The expert's lack of direct experience with immobiliser systems, and their reliance on secondary sources for their opinion, meant that the Local Court was entitled to find that the expert did not have the necessary expertise to provide admissible evidence on the specific issue. Consequently, the rejection of the report was not an error of law, and the appeal was dismissed.