Street & 7 Ors v Luna Park Sydney Pty Limited & 3 Ors

In this case, the plaintiffs, including Street, sought damages for injuries sustained at Luna Park Sydney. The defendants were Luna Park Sydney and others. The primary dispute involved the admissibility of hearsay evidence under section 64 of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), specifically regarding previous representations that were intertwined with inadmissible material. The plaintiffs argued that this evidence was necessary for self-corroboration and not subject to the hearsay rule. Additionally, the plaintiffs challenged the application of the Makita v Sprowles guidelines and the code of conduct for expert witnesses in relation to opinions expressed in business records.

The court had to determine whether the hearsay evidence was admissible under section 64, considering the plaintiffs' argument that it was not subject to the hearsay rule due to its self-corroborative nature and the absence of recent invention or challenges to the direct evidence. The court also needed to decide whether the guidelines and code of conduct for expert witnesses applied to the expressions of opinion found in business records. Furthermore, the court had to assess whether the inclusion of inadmissible material within the previous representations rendered the evidence inadmissible due to undue waste of time.

The court held that the hearsay evidence was admissible under section 64, as it served to corroborate the plaintiffs' accounts and there was no indication of recent invention or that direct evidence would be challenged. The court ruled that the Makita v Sprowles guidelines and the code of conduct for expert witnesses did not apply to expressions of opinion in business records, as these records were not provided for the primary purpose of giving expert evidence. The court concluded that the inadmissible material did not render the evidence inadmissible, as it did not result in an undue waste of time. The court allowed the appeal, ordering that the trial judge reconsider the evidence in light of these findings.