Beattie & Sutherland v Osman (No. 3) [2009] NSWSC 824

Beattie & Sutherland v Osman (No. 3) [2009] NSWSC 824

Annexure F was inadmissible because, in material respects, it was not a summary of the contents of documents within s 50 but rather included calculations or statements of amounts claimed. In any event, the defendants had not had a reasonable opportunity to examine or copy the voluminous supporting documents, including important source records. The supporting documents themselves were also refused because they were not served as evidence-in-chief in accordance with the timetable and the defendants would be prejudiced by their late tender.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Procedural and Other Rulings; Evidence Admissibility Ruling in Equity Division Corporations List Proceedings Concerning Validity of Appointment of Administrators / Hearing of Plaintiffs' Tender of Annexure F to an Affidavit Under S 50 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw), or Alternatively Tender of Supporting Documents
Outcome
Tender rejected.
Legal Topics
['admissibility' 'summary of Voluminous Documents' 'opinion Evidence' 'business Records' 'late Tender of Evidence' 'prejudice' 'voluntary Administration']
['evidence' 'corporations'] ['admissibility' 'summary of Voluminous Documents' 'opinion Evidence' 'business Records' 'late Tender of Evidence' 'prejudice' 'voluntary Administration']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Procedural and Other Rulings; Evidence Admissibility Ruling in Equity Division Corporations List Proceedings Concerning Validity of Appointment of Administrators / Hearing of Plaintiffs' Tender of Annexure F to an Affidavit Under S 50 of the Evidence Act 1995 (nsw), or Alternatively Tender of Supporting Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether annexure F to Mr Lee's affidavit could be tendered as a summary of documents under s 50 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)." 'Whether the defendants had been given a reasonable opportunity to examine or copy the documents said to support annexure F.' 'Whether the plaintiffs should be permitted to tender voluminous supporting documents not served as evidence-in-chief in accordance with the timetable.' 'Whether the defendants would be prejudiced by the late tender of the documents.']

Ratio Decidendi

Annexure F was inadmissible because, in material respects, it was not a summary of the contents of documents within s 50 but rather included calculations or statements of amounts claimed. In any event, the defendants had not had a reasonable opportunity to examine or copy the voluminous supporting documents, including important source records. The supporting documents themselves were also refused because they were not served as evidence-in-chief in accordance with the timetable and the defendants would be prejudiced by their late tender.

Court Disposition

Tender rejected.

Orders

  • ['The Court refused to make a direction under s 50 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' "The Court maintained the ruling that annexure F to Mr Lee's affidavit was inadmissible." 'The Court rejected the tender of the voluminous supporting documents.']