Sendy v The Commonwealth of Australia [2002] NSWSC 546

Sendy v The Commonwealth of Australia [2002] NSWSC 546

The Court declined to make advance rulings excluding the plaintiff's expert and related evidence because admissibility could not properly be determined by examining each report or doctor in isolation before the trial and before the plaintiff's evidence; the plaintiff had provided sufficient information about the case to be made, and the defendant was not disabled from answering it. Some admissibility questions should be determined at the hearing and may need to be deferred until all evidence is complete.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Damages Claim; Interlocutory Notice of Motion / Before Trial, on Defendant's Motion for Amendment of Defence, Advance Evidentiary Rulings, Restriction of Economic Loss Claim, and Related Relief
Outcome
Defendant's application for advance evidentiary rulings declined; application to vacate the evidence-on-commission fixture refused at least for the time being; costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'rulings in Advance of Trial' 'evidence on Commission' 'damages' 'expert Reports' 'contributory Negligence']
['practice and Procedure' 'evidence' 'personal Injury'] ['admissibility of Expert Evidence' 'rulings in Advance of Trial' 'evidence on Commission' 'damages' 'expert Reports' 'contributory Negligence']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Damages Claim; Interlocutory Notice of Motion / Before Trial, on Defendant's Motion for Amendment of Defence, Advance Evidentiary Rulings, Restriction of Economic Loss Claim, and Related Relief

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should determine the admissibility of specified statements, reports and articles before the commencement of the hearing.' 'Whether the plaintiff should be refused leave to rely on specified statements, reports and articles.' 'Whether alleged insufficiencies in the histories underlying expert reports justified advance exclusion of expert opinions.' "Whether the defendant was disabled from properly answering the plaintiff's case due to the form or content of the plaintiff's reports." "Whether the plaintiff's economic loss claim should be restricted so as not to include loss of income for the period 1 July 1979 to 30 June 1990."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court declined to make advance rulings excluding the plaintiff's expert and related evidence because admissibility could not properly be determined by examining each report or doctor in isolation before the trial and before the plaintiff's evidence; the plaintiff had provided sufficient information about the case to be made, and the defendant was not disabled from answering it. Some admissibility questions should be determined at the hearing and may need to be deferred until all evidence is complete.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application for advance evidentiary rulings declined; application to vacate the evidence-on-commission fixture refused at least for the time being; costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['Application for amendment of the defence stood over to the hearing.' 'Rulings sought on admissibility and reliance on specified statements, reports and articles declined.' 'Any application to vacate the fixture for taking evidence on commission refused at least for the time being.' 'Costs of the motion reserved.']