Hibbard v Playroom Pty Ltd

Norman Kingsley Hibbard was the applicant in proceedings before the High Court of Australia, seeking special leave to appeal against a decision of the Full Court. The dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence relied upon by an expert witness and the consequences of failing to object to such evidence.

The High Court was required to determine two primary legal issues. Firstly, the basis upon which facts referred to by an expert, forming the foundation of their opinion, could be admitted into evidence, and whether counsel tendering such expert evidence had a duty in relation to these facts. Secondly, the court had to consider whether it was necessary to object to expert evidence when the underlying facts were not otherwise proven by admissible evidence, and what the ramifications were if no objection was taken.

The applicant argued that certain adjustments made by an expert valuer, Mr Crane, to operating expenses of a business, which were crucial for determining its true net profit and market value, were based on information provided by the business proprietor, Mrs Carnell. While some adjustments were conceded as straightforward, others depended on Mrs Carnell's information. The applicant contended that the Full Court had erred in finding sufficient admissible evidence and that no objection had been taken to the expert's report or evidence. The procedure at first instance involved the tendering of Mr Crane's report, which contained figures attributed to an accountant, Mr Fenton. It was only during cross-examination that it became apparent these adjusted figures stemmed from information provided by Mrs Carnell.