ASIC v Rich [2005] NSWSC 1170

ASIC v Rich [2005] NSWSC 1170

The witness's experience in boards of large organisations constitutes specialised knowledge; the report discloses sufficient reasoning process; the probative value outweighs potential prejudice or waste of time. The evidence is therefore admissible and not excluded under section 135.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil / Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome
Evidence allowed
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' "directors' Responsibilities"]
['equity' 'evidence'] ['expert Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' "directors' Responsibilities"]

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 / Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether expert opinion evidence on directors' responsibilities satisfies section 79 of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)" 'Whether evidence should be rejected under section 135 of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) on discretionary grounds']

Ratio Decidendi

The witness's experience in boards of large organisations constitutes specialised knowledge; the report discloses sufficient reasoning process; the probative value outweighs potential prejudice or waste of time. The evidence is therefore admissible and not excluded under section 135.

Court Disposition

Evidence allowed

Orders

  • ['The third and fourth sentences of paragraph 20 of Mr Warburton’s report are allowed into evidence. The whole report annexed to the affidavit is formally read.']