Gooley v NSW Rural Assistance Authority [2018] NSWSC 593

Gooley v NSW Rural Assistance Authority [2018] NSWSC 593

The report of Mr Darel Hughes is ruled inadmissible under s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) because it does not contain independent expert opinion and fails to provide the requisite reasoning, merely adopting the plaintiffs' assertions without adequate analysis.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 May 2018
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application; Ruling on Evidence / Application for Advance Evidentiary Ruling Prior to Hearing, With Pending Amendments to Pleadings
Outcome
Report of Mr Darel Hughes ruled inadmissible under s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); other applications deferred.
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'pleadings and Amendments' 'cross Claim' 'advance Rulings (evidence)' 'banking Contracts']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'banking and Finance Law'] ['expert Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'pleadings and Amendments' 'cross Claim' 'advance Rulings (evidence)' 'banking Contracts']

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; Ruling on Evidence / Application for Advance Evidentiary Ruling Prior to Hearing, With Pending Amendments to Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the report of Mr Darel Hughes is admissible as expert evidence under s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)' "Whether certain paragraphs of Mr Gooley's affidavit and the report of Mr Wade are admissible" "Whether the plaintiffs' cross-claim is defective for lack of particularity and causation, and whether it should be struck out as embarrassing"]

Ratio Decidendi

The report of Mr Darel Hughes is ruled inadmissible under s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) because it does not contain independent expert opinion and fails to provide the requisite reasoning, merely adopting the plaintiffs' assertions without adequate analysis.

Court Disposition

Report of Mr Darel Hughes ruled inadmissible under s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); other applications deferred.

Orders

  • ['Rule pursuant to s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) that the report of Darel Hughes is not admissible.' "Further consideration of the Bank's Notice of Motion deferred until plaintiffs produce amended cross-claim and supplementary expert reports."]