Morris v Danoz Directions Pty Ltd (in Liq) (No 2) [2010] FCA 836
Parts of the expert report were inadmissible as they did not constitute expertise or failed to prove material matters; application to amend the statement of claim was refused due to prejudice and absence of explanation for delay.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 10 August 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Interlocutory Application / Reasons for Evidentiary and Amendment Rulings During Trial
- Outcome
- Application to amend pleadings dismissed; certain paragraphs of expert report ruled inadmissible
- Legal Topics
- ['admissibility of Expert Opinion' 'amendment of Pleadings' 'delay in Amendment' 'misleading or Deceptive Conduct']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Reasons for Evidentiary and Amendment Rulings During Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Admissibility of expert evidence regarding insolvency' 'Whether an expert’s process of reasoning is sufficiently disclosed' 'Whether late amendment to pleadings should be permitted during trial']
Ratio Decidendi
Parts of the expert report were inadmissible as they did not constitute expertise or failed to prove material matters; application to amend the statement of claim was refused due to prejudice and absence of explanation for delay.
Court Disposition
Application to amend pleadings dismissed; certain paragraphs of expert report ruled inadmissible
Orders
- ["Paragraph 7.5(9) of Mr Benjamin's statement of 7 July 2009 and paragraph 3.3 of Mr Benjamin's statement in reply of 1 September 2009 be inadmissible." "Applicants' motion to amend their statement of claim be dismissed."]
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment