Kirkpatrick v Kotis [2004] NSWSC 1248

Paragraph 3 of the plaintiff's affidavit, concerning excavation work allegedly observed on 13 September 2004, was not admissible because it could not make rationally more probable whether the alleged contempts on 9 or 10 September 2004 were committed within the meaning of section 55 of the Evidence Act 1995.

Jurisdiction: Australia
Judgment Date: 18 November 2004
Procedural Posture: Contempt Proceedings / Hearing of Objection to Admissibility of Paragraph 3 of Affidavit
Outcome: Evidence not admitted
Legal Topics: ['attachment and Sequestration' 'breach of Court Orders' 'admissibility of Subsequent Conduct Evidence' 'statement of Charge' 'relevance Under Section 55 of the Evidence Act 1995']

['procedure' 'evidence' 'contempt of Court'] ['attachment and Sequestration' 'breach of Court Orders' 'admissibility of Subsequent Conduct Evidence' 'statement of Charge' 'relevance Under Section 55 of the Evidence Act 1995']

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

Procedural Posture

Contempt Proceedings / Hearing of Objection to Admissibility of Paragraph 3 of Affidavit

Legal Issues

1 ['Whether evidence of excavation work allegedly observed on 13 September 2004 was admissible at a hearing concerning a contempt charge alleging breaches on 9 and 10 September 2004.' 'Whether subsequent conduct can be relevant to deciding whether a contempt has been committed, as distinct from penalty.']

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Evidence not admitted

Orders

['Paragraph 3 of the affidavit of Benjamin David Kirkpatrick sworn 13 September 2004 was rejected.']