Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 670

Marsden v Amalgamated Television Services Pty Limited [2000] NSWSC 670

The proposed evidence of Miss Earl is inadmissible because there is insufficient connection between the alleged bias and any agreement relevant to the case, and section 106(a) should not be applied so broadly as to circumvent the collateral facts rule.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 July 2000
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome
Evidence excluded as inadmissible.
Legal Topics
['admissibility' 'collateral Facts Rule' 'credibility' 'bias' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 106(a) and (c)' 'section 135(c) Discretion']
['evidence'] ['admissibility' 'collateral Facts Rule' 'credibility' 'bias' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) S 106(a) and (c)' 'section 135(c) Discretion']

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

Defamation / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the evidence of Miss Earl as to prior statements denied by Mr Elomari is admissible under s 106(a) of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether proposed testimony is excluded by the collateral facts rule.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed evidence of Miss Earl is inadmissible because there is insufficient connection between the alleged bias and any agreement relevant to the case, and section 106(a) should not be applied so broadly as to circumvent the collateral facts rule.

Court Disposition

Evidence excluded as inadmissible.

Orders

  • ["Objection to the admissibility of Miss Earl's proposed testimony is upheld; evidence excluded."]