Mendicino and Mendicino and Ors; (No 6)

In *Mendicino and Mendicino and Ors (No 6)*, Kent J of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife for permission to tender expert evidence from Mr W of W Pty Ltd. The application concerned the admissibility of expert opinions in proceedings, specifically in relation to Rule 15.52 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth) and section 79(1) of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth).

The central legal issues before the court were whether the opinions expressed by the proposed expert, Mr W, met the criteria for admissibility under section 79(1) of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth). This required determining if Mr W possessed "specialised knowledge" relevant to the opinions he intended to provide, and whether those opinions were based wholly or substantially upon such specialised knowledge. The court also had to consider if any admissible opinions could be extracted from the report concerning valuation or discounting.

Kent J found that the wife had not demonstrated, nor made apparent, that Mr W possessed the requisite specialised knowledge that was directly linked to the opinions he sought to rely upon. Consequently, the court concluded that the opinions expressed by Mr W were not admissible under section 79(1) of the *Evidence Act 1995* (Cth). As it was not possible to extract any admissible opinions regarding value or discounting from the report, the application was dismissed. The wife's application for permission to tender the report and adduce evidence from Mr W was therefore dismissed.