C v S [2024] NSWDC 346

C v S [2024] NSWDC 346

The defendant established a legitimate forensic purpose for withholding surveillance and medical expert evidence from the plaintiff, as disclosure posed a real risk that the plaintiff would tailor her evidence to meet the material, affecting the ability to test her credit. Accordingly, Markus orders were justified under the principles identified in Markus, Halpin, Prasad, Latimer, Jasem, and Sun. Suppression and non-publication orders were also appropriate to maintain the integrity of the proceedings.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application (markus Order), Ex Parte, Prior to Final Hearing
Outcome
Markus order granted; suppression and non-publication orders made; costs reserved
Legal Topics
['markus Order' 'exemption From Service of Evidence' 'surveillance Evidence' 'medical Expert Report' 'suppression Order' 'practice and Procedure']
['civil Procedure' 'evidence' 'personal Injury'] ['markus Order' 'exemption From Service of Evidence' 'surveillance Evidence' 'medical Expert Report' 'suppression Order' 'practice and Procedure']

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 / Interlocutory Application (markus Order), Ex Parte, Prior to Final Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a Markus order should be granted exempting pre-trial service of surveillance and medical expert evidence' 'Whether suppression and non-publication orders should be made']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant established a legitimate forensic purpose for withholding surveillance and medical expert evidence from the plaintiff, as disclosure posed a real risk that the plaintiff would tailor her evidence to meet the material, affecting the ability to test her credit. Accordingly, Markus orders were justified under the principles identified in Markus, Halpin, Prasad, Latimer, Jasem, and Sun. Suppression and non-publication orders were also appropriate to maintain the integrity of the proceedings.

Court Disposition

Markus order granted; suppression and non-publication orders made; costs reserved

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to file the Notice of Motion and affidavit with exhibits in court upon undertaking to pay filing fee' 'Notice of Motion returnable instanter' 'Notice of Motion to be heard ex parte and in a closed court' 'Defendant granted leave to tender at hearing the specified surveillance footage, investigation...