Monteleone v Thorn [2020] NSWSC 1620

Monteleone v Thorn [2020] NSWSC 1620

The Court hearing the trial is best placed to determine the balance of issues under r 31.10 and admissibility under the Evidence Act 1995, because that Court will be seized of the facts and submissions from both parties. It was inappropriate to grant leave in advance, so the question whether the material should be admitted despite non-service should be left to the trial judge.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Procedural Ruling / Notice of Motion Dated 29 October 2020 Seeking Orders to Excuse Compliance With R 31.10(1) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005
Outcome
Notice of Motion dismissed.
Legal Topics
['service of Films and Investigation Material' 'rule 31.10 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005' 'legitimate Forensic Purpose for Non Disclosure' 'admissibility of Surveillance Material']
['civil Procedure' 'evidence'] ['service of Films and Investigation Material' 'rule 31.10 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005' 'legitimate Forensic Purpose for Non Disclosure' 'admissibility of Surveillance Material']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Civil Procedure Procedural Ruling / Notice of Motion Dated 29 October 2020 Seeking Orders to Excuse Compliance With R 31.10(1) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants should be excused from compliance with r 31.10(1) of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 in respect of investigation reports and accompanying video material.' 'Whether the question of service, legitimate forensic purpose and admissibility should be determined before trial or by the trial judge.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court hearing the trial is best placed to determine the balance of issues under r 31.10 and admissibility under the Evidence Act 1995, because that Court will be seized of the facts and submissions from both parties. It was inappropriate to grant leave in advance, so the question whether the material should be admitted despite non-service should be left to the trial judge.

Court Disposition

Notice of Motion dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Dismiss the Notice of Motion of 29 October 2020.']