Australian and New Zealand Banking Group v Pola [2013] NSWSC 1502

Australian and New Zealand Banking Group v Pola [2013] NSWSC 1502

Part Nine of Mr Purtle's expert report was rejected because the critical assumptions supporting his opinion regarding the probable transfer value of Water Licence 602026, namely that such a licence could be transferred to the Commonwealth by means short of a transfer of the land, were not supported by any evidence and were, in some respects, contradicted by the evidence before the court. Therefore, the opinion evidence was inadmissible under the proof of assumption rule.

Parties
Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant: Australia and New Zealand Banking Group; Defendant/first Cross Claimant: Laurence James Pola; Interested Party/second Cross Claimant: Silvia Frances Pola; Third Cross Defendant: Elders Rural Services Limited; Fourth Cross Defendant: Richard Allpass; Fifth Cross Defendant: Brandon Devine; Seventh Cross Defendant: Agrimas Pty Ltd; Eighth Cross Defendant: Devbar Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence
Outcome
Part of expert report rejected
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Proof of Assumption Rule, Valuation of Property, Mortgagee's Power of Sale
Practice and Procedure Admissibility of Expert Evidence Proof of Assumption Rule Valuation of Property Mortgagee's Power of Sale

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group

Plaintiff/first Cross Defendant

Laurence James Pola

Defendant/first Cross Claimant

Silvia Frances Pola

Interested Party/second Cross Claimant

Elders Rural Services Limited

Third Cross Defendant

Richard Allpass

Fourth Cross Defendant

Brandon Devine

Fifth Cross Defendant

Agrimas Pty Ltd

Seventh Cross Defendant

Devbar Pty Limited

Eighth Cross Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Ruling on Admissibility of Expert Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Part Nine of Mr Purtle's expert report should be admitted as evidence concerning the probable transfer value of Water Licence 602026
  2. 2 Whether Mr Purtle's opinion is based on assumptions unsupported by evidence (proof of assumption rule)

Ratio Decidendi

Part Nine of Mr Purtle's expert report was rejected because the critical assumptions supporting his opinion regarding the probable transfer value of Water Licence 602026, namely that such a licence could be transferred to the Commonwealth by means short of a transfer of the land, were not supported by any evidence and were, in some respects, contradicted by the evidence before the court. Therefore, the opinion evidence was inadmissible under the proof of assumption rule.

Court Disposition

Part of expert report rejected

Orders

  • Part Nine of the expert report of Mr David Purtle is rejected as inadmissible evidence.