Barescape Pty Ltd atf The Vs Family Trust & Ors v Bacchus Holdings Pty Ltd atf The Bacchus Holdings Trust & Anor [2011] NSWSC 1002
The joint expert reports, including individual memoranda, are excluded from evidence under Evidence Act s 135 because their admission would be unfairly prejudicial and misleading, particularly as Mr Jugmans' reports fail to disclose the reasoning process required for expert evidence under the Evidence Act.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 August 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
- Outcome
- Joint expert reports excluded from evidence under Evidence Act s 135.
- Legal Topics
- ['expert Evidence' 'admissibility' 'joint Expert Reports' 'discretion Under Evidence Act S 135']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether UCPR r 31.26 requires admission of joint expert report' 'Whether joint expert report can be excluded under Evidence Act s 135 due to prejudicial effect' 'Whether expert report complies with requirements of Evidence Act s 79']
Ratio Decidendi
The joint expert reports, including individual memoranda, are excluded from evidence under Evidence Act s 135 because their admission would be unfairly prejudicial and misleading, particularly as Mr Jugmans' reports fail to disclose the reasoning process required for expert evidence under the Evidence Act.
Court Disposition
Joint expert reports excluded from evidence under Evidence Act s 135.
Orders
- ["Joint expert's report excluded under Evidence Act s 135"]
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