David Joe v THE STAR PTY LIMITED [2022] NSWDC 361

David Joe v THE STAR PTY LIMITED [2022] NSWDC 361

The cross-examination about the affidavit, what happened at the casino, whether Mr Lie played his own money, and the witness's answers that he did fund Mr Lie raised a matter arising out of cross-examination and challenged the witness's credibility. Re-examination on the explanation was therefore permitted under s 39(a), or alternatively leave was granted under s 39(b).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Objection to Question Posed to Plaintiff During Re Examination
Outcome
Re-examination allowed.
Legal Topics
['re Examination' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 39(a)' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 39(b)']
['evidence'] ['re Examination' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 39(a)' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 39(b)']

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 / Objection to Question Posed to Plaintiff During Re Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the plaintiff could be re-examined about his explanation for saying he gave money to Mr Lie outside the casino after answers given in cross-examination.' 'Whether leave should be granted under s 39(b) if the matter did not fall within s 39(a).']

Ratio Decidendi

The cross-examination about the affidavit, what happened at the casino, whether Mr Lie played his own money, and the witness's answers that he did fund Mr Lie raised a matter arising out of cross-examination and challenged the witness's credibility. Re-examination on the explanation was therefore permitted under s 39(a), or alternatively leave was granted under s 39(b).

Court Disposition

Re-examination allowed.

Orders

  • ['Re-examination allowed.']