State Forests of NSW v Scott Leslie Dinnerville

The case of *State Forests of NSW v Scott Leslie Dinnerville* involved an appeal to the Court of Appeal of New South Wales concerning the admissibility and weight of medical evidence presented in a trial. The dispute centred on the plaintiff's claim, where medical reports from the defendant's doctors were read into evidence rather than the doctors giving oral testimony and being subject to cross-examination.

The primary legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether the trial judge had misdirected the jury regarding the weight to be given to the defendant's medical evidence, specifically concerning the fact that these witnesses had not been cross-examined. The appellant argued that a statement by the judge that the evidence "has not been able to be challenged" was a misdirection, and that the summing up lacked balance by not explicitly instructing the jury not to draw adverse inferences from the defendant's witnesses not giving oral evidence.

The Court of Appeal reasoned that the trial judge's statement that the evidence "has not been able to be challenged" was capable of being interpreted in a way that did not constitute a misdirection. It was held that this statement could reasonably have been understood by the jury as referring to the historical fact that the doctors were unavailable for cross-examination, rather than suggesting any inherent disadvantage to the defendant's case or advantage to the plaintiff's. Furthermore, the judge had explicitly directed the jury that it was entirely a matter for them to decide what weight to give to the evidence presented through reports, and that they were entitled to prefer oral evidence over read reports, but were not obliged to do so. The court found that the summing up, when considered in its entirety, adequately conveyed that the jury had the discretion to assess the weight of all evidence, including that presented by way of read reports.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the costs of the appeal.