Carriage v Stockland Development Pty Limited (No 5) [2004] NSWLEC 674

Carriage v Stockland Development Pty Limited (No 5) [2004] NSWLEC 674

The Court held that, despite the principle of finality in litigation, the interests of justice warranted exercising discretion in favour of the applicant to reopen the hearing, limited to the specific evidence and reply evidence raised in this motion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion to Reopen Hearing / Post Judgment, Pre Final Orders
Outcome
Leave granted to reopen hearing
Legal Topics
['reopening Hearings' 'admission of Fresh Evidence' 'interests of Justice']
['administrative Law'] ['reopening Hearings' 'admission of Fresh Evidence' 'interests of Justice']

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

Notice of Motion to Reopen Hearing / Post Judgment, Pre Final Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to reopen the hearing to allow additional evidence' 'What principles govern the reopening of a hearing after judgment but before final orders']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that, despite the principle of finality in litigation, the interests of justice warranted exercising discretion in favour of the applicant to reopen the hearing, limited to the specific evidence and reply evidence raised in this motion.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to reopen hearing

Orders

  • ['The applicant be granted leave to reopen the hearing' 'Costs of this motion be reserved' 'Proceedings referred to the Registrar for directions on 3 December 2004']