Expert evidence not excluded in claim arising from pyrite in building materials

The High Court has refused an application by defendants to exclude the expert evidence of a plaintiff in a claim for indemnity arising from the presence of pyrite in building material, on the grounds that the defendant would not be prejudiced provided that it had more time to put in expert evidence in response. The original decision to admit expert evidence focused on homeowners' claims for physical damage due to defective stone supplied by the defendant, which was believed to require extensive remediation under the 2013 Standard. However, the 2017 Standard significantly altered the understanding of the necessary remediation, reducing the scope of the claim. The court acknowledged the evolving nature of the case, including the plaintiff's settlements with homeowners and the subsequent amendments to the pleadings. The court determined that the plaintiff is entitled to seek full indemnity from the defendant for the costs of settlement with homeowners, provided it can prove the reasonableness of the settlement and the defendant's concurrent liability.