Oliver v Lake Side Resort Development Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 501

Oliver v Lake Side Resort Development Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 501

The answer was inadmissible because, when it was given, all persons in dispute had not consented to the adducing of the protected settlement communication, and any consent could not be retrospectively constructed from the answer itself. Section 131(2)(c) was also not satisfied because the answer did not promote a proper understanding of other evidence already adduced.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Equity Proceeding / Ruling on Admissibility of Answer Given by Witness During Cross Examination
Outcome
Direction that witness's answer be removed from record.
Legal Topics
['admissibility' 'settlement Negotiations' 'protected Communications Between Persons in Dispute' 'consent Under Evidence Act 1995 S.131']
['evidence'] ['admissibility' 'settlement Negotiations' 'protected Communications Between Persons in Dispute' 'consent Under Evidence Act 1995 S.131']

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

Equity Proceeding / Ruling on Admissibility of Answer Given by Witness During Cross Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an answer given in cross-examination disclosing a communication protected by Evidence Act 1995 s.131(1)(a) was admissible.' "Whether the witness's disclosure could be treated as an offer to consent or waive the protection under Evidence Act 1995 s.131(2)(a), (b) or (c), capable of acceptance by the plaintiffs."]

Ratio Decidendi

The answer was inadmissible because, when it was given, all persons in dispute had not consented to the adducing of the protected settlement communication, and any consent could not be retrospectively constructed from the answer itself. Section 131(2)(c) was also not satisfied because the answer did not promote a proper understanding of other evidence already adduced.

Court Disposition

Direction that witness's answer be removed from record.

Orders

  • ['The answer is inadmissible.' 'The answer will be removed from the record of the proceedings.']