Morris v Danoz Directions Pty Ltd (in Liq) (No 2) [2010] FCA 836

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.

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

Interlocutory Application / Reasons for Evidentiary and Amendment Rulings During Trial

  1. 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."]