Wright v Optus Administration & Anor (No 4) [2013] NSWSC 1716
The question seeking the plaintiff's eBay details during cross-examination was rejected as it constituted fishing for information, went wholly to credit, and was excluded by the credibility rule in s 102 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); no exception under Part 3.7 of the Act was established.
- Parties
- Plaintiff: Glen Wright; First Defendant: Optus Administration Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: IPA Personnel Pty Limited
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 November 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Personal Injury / Ruling During Cross Examination at Trial
- Outcome
- question rejected
- Legal Topics
- Admissibility of Questions, Credibility of Witness, Cross Examination, Credit
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Glen Wright
Plaintiff
Optus Administration Pty Ltd
First Defendant
IPA Personnel Pty Limited
Second Defendant
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Ruling During Cross Examination at Trial
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a question seeking eBay details from plaintiff during cross-examination is admissible under Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
- 2 Whether question goes beyond permissible limits in cross-examination
- 3 Whether credibility rule under s 102 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) excludes this question
Ratio Decidendi
The question seeking the plaintiff's eBay details during cross-examination was rejected as it constituted fishing for information, went wholly to credit, and was excluded by the credibility rule in s 102 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW); no exception under Part 3.7 of the Act was established.
Court Disposition
question rejected
Orders
- The question seeking eBay details from the plaintiff is disallowed.
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