REESING & REESING

The parties, Reesing & Reesing, were before Harland J for a final hearing concerning parenting arrangements. While most issues had been agreed between the parties, a dispute remained regarding the admissibility and weight to be given to expert evidence.

The central legal issue before the court was the extent to which expert evidence, specifically concerning the psychological state of the children, could be relied upon when the expert had ventured beyond their stated area of expertise. The court was required to determine whether such evidence should be admitted and, if so, what weight it should carry in the final determination of parenting orders.

Harland J emphasised the critical importance of experts confining their opinions to their designated areas of expertise. The judge noted that while the expert was qualified in child psychology, their report contained observations and conclusions that extended into areas of legal assessment and parental capacity, which were matters for the court to determine. Consequently, the court indicated that it would give limited weight to those portions of the expert's evidence that fell outside their professional domain, preferring to rely on evidence directly relevant to their recognised expertise and the court's own assessment of the facts.