Stambolziovski v Nestorovic [2014] NSWDC 291

Stambolziovski v Nestorovic [2014] NSWDC 291

The plaintiff failed to serve the supplementary expert report when tendering the initial report, contrary to r 31.34. The supplementary report was relevant and could have impacted the conduct of cross-examination. The first defendant is entitled to further cross-examine the plaintiff to cure any prejudice from the late disclosure.

Parties
Plaintiff: Blaga Stambolziovski; First Defendant/cross Claimant to Second Cross Claim: Lilly Nestorovic; Second Defendant: Camanaro Prestige Properties Pty Limited ACN 101 515 744 t/as Sydneyhome Real Estate Ramsgate Beach; Cross Defendant to Second Cross Claim: Sasha Stambolziovski
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Ruling on Application to Further Cross Examine Plaintiff
Outcome
Leave granted to first defendant to further cross-examine the plaintiff; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
Cross Examination, Expert Report Disclosure, Supplementary Expert Reports
Civil Procedure Evidence Cross Examination Expert Report Disclosure Supplementary Expert Reports

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Blaga Stambolziovski

Plaintiff

Lilly Nestorovic

First Defendant/cross Claimant to Second Cross Claim

Camanaro Prestige Properties Pty Limited ACN 101 515 744 t/as Sydneyhome Real Estate Ramsgate Beach

Second Defendant

Sasha Stambolziovski

Cross Defendant to Second Cross Claim

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Ruling on Application to Further Cross Examine Plaintiff

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the supplementary report was properly disclosed under Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 r 31.34
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to further cross-examine the plaintiff based on late disclosure of a supplementary expert report

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff failed to serve the supplementary expert report when tendering the initial report, contrary to r 31.34. The supplementary report was relevant and could have impacted the conduct of cross-examination. The first defendant is entitled to further cross-examine the plaintiff to cure any prejudice from the late disclosure.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to first defendant to further cross-examine the plaintiff; costs reserved.

Orders

  • Counsel granted leave to further cross-examine the plaintiff.
  • Costs of the application reserved.