MCCALL & CLARK

In *McCall & Clark*, heard before Tree J, the dispute concerned the admission of further evidence during a family law trial. The application arose after an expert witness, who had previously provided recommendations, was recalled to give evidence concerning new material that had emerged during the proceedings. This new material had led to a significant alteration in the expert's prior recommendations.

The central legal issue before the court was whether to permit the further evidence to be taken *de bene esse*. This involved considering the principles of procedural fairness in the context of admitting evidence that had become relevant due to developments during the trial, and whether the admission of such evidence could be debated at a later stage.

Tree J reasoned that procedural fairness required that parties have a proper opportunity to respond to new evidence. The significant change in the expert's recommendations, prompted by material that emerged during the trial, meant that the original evidence might no longer accurately reflect the expert's current opinion. Allowing the evidence to be taken *de bene esse* would ensure that the court had the most up-to-date and relevant expert opinion, while preserving the ability of the parties to challenge its admissibility or weight at a later point. The court therefore ordered that the further evidence be taken *de bene esse*.