Description
In a surveyors' negligence case, the Defendant's expert gave new evidence orally at trial as to the stability of roof trusses which formed the basis for the judge's finding that there was no defect in the roof. There was no procedural irregularity in allowing such evidence where the Claimant's Counsel had an opportunity to consider the issues with his expert and to cross-examine thereafter. An application to adduce further evidence from the Claimant's expert on appeal would fail where no application had been made to recall that expert at trial.
