Department of Education and Training v Sinclair [2005] NSWCA 402
Leave to amend was refused because the proposed new ground, although framed as a question of law about the onus under s11A, concerned an issue that had been common ground below and could have affected the evidence led at first instance; if leave were granted, the ground would necessarily fail on that basis.
Source-derived case information.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 16 November 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Application to Amend Grounds of Appeal / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Amend Grounds of Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave to amend not granted.
- Legal Topics
- ['application to Amend Grounds of Appeal' 'new Issue on Appeal' 'onus of Proof' 'workers Compensation Act 1987 S11 A']
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Application to Amend Grounds of Appeal / Court of Appeal Application for Leave to Amend Grounds of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to amend the grounds of appeal by adding a ground that the President erred in holding that the onus of proving reasonableness within s11A of the Workers Compensation Act 1987 lay on the Appellant.' 'Whether a new issue concerning onus under s11A could be raised for the first time on appeal where it could have been the subject of additional evidence below.']
Ratio Decidendi
Leave to amend was refused because the proposed new ground, although framed as a question of law about the onus under s11A, concerned an issue that had been common ground below and could have affected the evidence led at first instance; if leave were granted, the ground would necessarily fail on that basis.
Court Disposition
Leave to amend not granted.
Orders
- ['Leave to amend not granted.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment