Hopkins v AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (No 6) [2015] FCA 1442

Hopkins v AECOM Australia Pty Ltd (No 6) [2015] FCA 1442

Although the Lonie report was filed very late and AECOM's explanation for changing position was not satisfactory, the trial was still more than nine months away and Mallesons would have ample opportunity to respond. The report was not shown to be outside the broad scope of AECOM's pleaded case, and causation difficulties or possible future cross-claims did not justify refusing leave. AECOM was therefore granted leave to rely upon the Lonie report at trial, subject to admissibility objections.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Leave to Rely Upon an Affidavit and Expert Report at Trial / Pre Trial; Hearing Scheduled to Commence in September 2016
Outcome
AECOM granted leave to rely upon the Lonie report at the trial; directions made for any Mallesons application for leave to file any cross-claim.
Legal Topics
['leave to Rely on Late Expert Evidence' 'expert Report by Solicitor' 'cross Claims' 'pleadings' 'causation']
['civil Procedure' 'evidence'] ['leave to Rely on Late Expert Evidence' 'expert Report by Solicitor' 'cross Claims' 'pleadings' 'causation']

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

Interlocutory Application for Leave to Rely Upon an Affidavit and Expert Report at Trial / Pre Trial; Hearing Scheduled to Commence in September 2016

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether AECOM should be granted leave to rely upon the affidavit and expert report of James Lonie dated 26 November 2015 at the trial.' "Whether the Lonie report was directed to a case outside the scope of AECOM's pleaded case against Mallesons." 'Whether alleged pleading deficiencies, causation issues, and the possibility that Mallesons may wish to file further cross-claims justified refusal of leave.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the Lonie report was filed very late and AECOM's explanation for changing position was not satisfactory, the trial was still more than nine months away and Mallesons would have ample opportunity to respond. The report was not shown to be outside the broad scope of AECOM's pleaded case, and causation difficulties or possible future cross-claims did not justify refusing leave. AECOM was therefore granted leave to rely upon the Lonie report at trial, subject to admissibility objections.

Court Disposition

AECOM granted leave to rely upon the Lonie report at the trial; directions made for any Mallesons application for leave to file any cross-claim.

Orders

  • ['The cross-claimant (AECOM) have leave to rely upon the affidavit and expert report of James Lonie dated 26 November 2015 at the trial.' 'Any application by the cross-respondent to the tenth cross-claim (Mallesons) for leave to file any cross-claim is to be made by interlocutory application: (a) to be made...