(Re Chapman) State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Amaca Pty Limited & Anor (No. 2) [2004] NSWDDT 30

(Re Chapman) State Rail Authority of New South Wales v Amaca Pty Limited & Anor (No. 2) [2004] NSWDDT 30

Leave to interpose Professor Breslin at this stage is refused; any relevant opinions should be provided by way of report and served so the opposing party can address them. To allow oral evidence without this may cause unfairness.

Parties
Cross Claimant: State Rail Authority of New South Wales; Cross Defendant: Amaca Pty Limited; Wallaby Grip Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Cross Claim / Interlocutory Application (leave to Call Expert Witness)
Outcome
Application for leave to call expert refused.
Legal Topics
Asbestos Liability, Cross Claims, Settlement Reasonableness, Expert Evidence
Torts Asbestos Liability Cross Claims Settlement Reasonableness Expert Evidence

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State Rail Authority of New South Wales

Cross Claimant

Amaca Pty Limited

Cross Defendant

Wallaby Grip Limited

Procedural Posture

Cross Claim / Interlocutory Application (leave to Call Expert Witness)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to the cross-defendant to call expert witness Professor Breslin without serving a new report to address the reasonableness of the settlement.

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to interpose Professor Breslin at this stage is refused; any relevant opinions should be provided by way of report and served so the opposing party can address them. To allow oral evidence without this may cause unfairness.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to call expert refused.

Orders

  • Application for leave to call Professor Breslin denied.