Commissioner of Police v Robbs [2021] NSWIRComm 1017

Commissioner of Police v Robbs [2021] NSWIRComm 1017

The motion to admit fresh evidence was dismissed because the evidence did not satisfy the requirement that it be likely to produce a different result, as required by Akins v National Australia Bank, and the evidence would only be relevant on a potential re-hearing, not on the present grounds of appeal.

Parties
Appellant/applicant on the Motion: Commissioner of Police; Respondent/respondent on the Motion: Troy Robbs
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal (motion to Admit Fresh Evidence) / Interlocutory Determination on Notice of Motion in Appeal
Outcome
appellant's notice of motion dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal, Admission of Fresh Evidence, Disciplinary Transfers, Public Interest

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Police

Appellant/applicant on the Motion

Troy Robbs

Respondent/respondent on the Motion

Procedural Posture

Appeal (motion to Admit Fresh Evidence) / Interlocutory Determination on Notice of Motion in Appeal

  1. 1 Whether special grounds exist to admit fresh evidence on appeal under s 191(2) of the Industrial Relations Act 1996 (NSW)
  2. 2 Whether the fresh evidence would probably have resulted in a different outcome at first instance

Ratio Decidendi

The motion to admit fresh evidence was dismissed because the evidence did not satisfy the requirement that it be likely to produce a different result, as required by Akins v National Australia Bank, and the evidence would only be relevant on a potential re-hearing, not on the present grounds of appeal.

Court Disposition

appellant's notice of motion dismissed

Orders

  • The appellant's notice of motion is dismissed.
  • Pursuant to s 164A the publication and disclosure of the residential address of the respondent, Troy Robbs, is prohibited.