Peri Australia Pty Limited v Celtic Form Pty Limited (No 2)

Peri Australia Pty Limited, the plaintiff, sought to adduce evidence from a building proprietor, Mr. Peri, who lacked formal qualifications but had substantial experience in the building industry. Celtic Form Pty Limited, the defendant, opposed the admissibility of this evidence on the grounds that it breached the opinion rule, which generally precludes laypersons from providing expert evidence. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The court was tasked with determining whether Mr. Peri's evidence, based on his extensive experience in the building industry, could be admitted despite his lack of formal qualifications. The key issue was whether Mr. Peri's experience qualified him as an expert under the opinion rule, which generally requires expert witnesses to have formal qualifications or recognised expertise in the relevant field.

The court found that Mr. Peri's experience, while not formalised through qualifications, was nonetheless substantial and relevant to the matters at hand. The court held that experience could be a sufficient basis for expert status, particularly where the subject matter is practical and experience-based rather than theoretical. The court determined that Mr. Peri's evidence was admissible as it was relevant and his experience provided a sound basis for his opinions. The opinion rule was not an absolute barrier to the admissibility of his evidence.

The Supreme Court allowed the evidence, overruling the objection raised by the defendant. The court recognised that practical experience could be as valuable as formal qualifications in certain contexts, particularly in the building industry where practical skills and knowledge are paramount.