Anthony Glohe v Nicholas Simington [2016] NSWDC 129

Anthony Glohe v Nicholas Simington [2016] NSWDC 129

Leave was granted for the defendant to ask additional oral questions to their expert witness because the circumstances were similar to those contemplated by UCPR 31.28(4)(b) and did not constitute a material departure from procedural fairness.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedural and Other Rulings
Outcome
Evidence admitted.
Legal Topics
['negligence' 'road Accident Cases' 'liability of Drivers of Vehicles' 'failure to Look Out' 'pedestrian Accidents' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'expert Opinion' 'objection Under UCPR 31.28(3)(c)']
['torts' 'evidence'] ['negligence' 'road Accident Cases' 'liability of Drivers of Vehicles' 'failure to Look Out' 'pedestrian Accidents' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'expert Opinion' 'objection Under UCPR 31.28(3)(c)']

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

Civil / Procedural and Other Rulings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether additional oral expert evidence-in-chief can be given without serving an updated report under UCPR 31.28(3)(c)' 'Whether circumstances justify granting leave for additional questions to expert witness based on new evidence adduced since original report']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted for the defendant to ask additional oral questions to their expert witness because the circumstances were similar to those contemplated by UCPR 31.28(4)(b) and did not constitute a material departure from procedural fairness.

Court Disposition

Evidence admitted.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted for defendant to ask additional questions of expert witness.']