Georgeski v Owners Corporation SP49833 [2004] NSWSC 945
The correspondence sought to be tendered was not admissible under either s.11 or s.131(2)(k) of the Evidence Act 1995. There was no abuse of process properly raised and no deliberate abuse of power shown. The s.131(1) exclusion applies.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Annette Georgeski; First Defendant: Owners Corporation SP 49833; Second Defendant: Anne Catherine Hynd; Third Defendant: Joan Mary Hutchinson; Fourth Defendant: State of New South Wales
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 October 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Equity Proceeding / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
- Outcome
- Tender of correspondence rejected
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Settlement Correspondence, Abuse of Process
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Annette Georgeski
Plaintiff
Owners Corporation SP 49833
First Defendant
Anne Catherine Hynd
Second Defendant
Joan Mary Hutchinson
Third Defendant
State of New South Wales
Fourth Defendant
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceeding / Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether correspondence concerning settlement negotiations is admissible under exceptions in Evidence Act 1995
- 2 Whether s.11 or s.131(2)(k) of the Evidence Act 1995 applies
Ratio Decidendi
The correspondence sought to be tendered was not admissible under either s.11 or s.131(2)(k) of the Evidence Act 1995. There was no abuse of process properly raised and no deliberate abuse of power shown. The s.131(1) exclusion applies.
Court Disposition
Tender of correspondence rejected
Orders
- The documents sought to be tendered by the second and third defendants, being the settlement correspondence in the period October 2003 to September 2004, are rejected in obedience to s.131(1) of the Evidence Act 1995.
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