Dahl v Grice appears to be the most recent (c 1974) Victorian authority for the proposition that if expert evidence as to a particular fact is ‘possible’, then the tribunal of fact can (arguably should) take into account any lay evidence and inferences to elevate ‘possible’ to ‘probable’.
The proposition is hardly novel.
Application of the authority would mean that where there are conflicting expert theories, other non-expert evidence may result in the determination of one of those theories as the most probable.