Gemtaf P/L & Ors v Tradebanc International P/L [No 2] [2000] NSWSC 705

Gemtaf P/L & Ors v Tradebanc International P/L [No 2] [2000] NSWSC 705

In the unusual circumstances, and because both parties jointly sought that course, the Court would proceed on the basis of the amended stated case, the exhibits before the Magistrate, and the Magistrate's judgment, disregarding entirely the evidence given after the respondent's 19 May 1999 application to call evidence. The respondent should pay the plaintiffs' costs thrown away by that application, while each party should bear its own costs on the subpoena objection notice of motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal by Stated Case Against a Local Court Magistrate's Decision / Application in Respect of the Stated Case Concerning Evidentiary Material and Costs
Outcome
Evidentiary material confined; later evidence disregarded; costs orders made in relation to the application to call evidence and subpoena objection.
Legal Topics
['stated Case' 'sufficiency of Stated Case' 'part 32 R 7' 'admission of Further Evidence' 'costs Thrown Away' 'subpoenas']
['civil Procedure' 'appeals' 'evidence'] ['stated Case' 'sufficiency of Stated Case' 'part 32 R 7' 'admission of Further Evidence' 'costs Thrown Away' 'subpoenas']

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

Appeal by Stated Case Against a Local Court Magistrate's Decision / Application in Respect of the Stated Case Concerning Evidentiary Material and Costs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the evidentiary material in the stated case appeal should be confined to the material available before the respondent's application to call evidence on 19 May 1999." 'Whether evidence given after the application to call evidence should be disregarded.' 'What costs orders should be made in relation to the application to call evidence and subpoena issues.']

Ratio Decidendi

In the unusual circumstances, and because both parties jointly sought that course, the Court would proceed on the basis of the amended stated case, the exhibits before the Magistrate, and the Magistrate's judgment, disregarding entirely the evidence given after the respondent's 19 May 1999 application to call evidence. The respondent should pay the plaintiffs' costs thrown away by that application, while each party should bear its own costs on the subpoena objection notice of motion.

Court Disposition

Evidentiary material confined; later evidence disregarded; costs orders made in relation to the application to call evidence and subpoena objection.

Orders

  • ['The Court will disregard entirely the evidence given after Mr Bellanto QC made his application to call evidence on 19 May 1999.' "Tradebanc International Pty Limited should pay the plaintiff's costs thrown away as a result of the application made, which was the subject of the judgment of 19 May 1999, including the...