Sinn-v-Rennie [1999] NSWSC 646

Sinn-v-Rennie [1999] NSWSC 646

The Magistrate did not commit an error warranting relief by failing to refer specifically to Jones -v- Dunkel, because the evidence said to show that Mr. Weatherstone could give conclusive evidence was hearsay and speculative, the Defendants had called evidence contradicting the Plaintiffs' inference, there was no material establishing what Mr. Weatherstone could say or that the Defendants feared to call him, he was not shown to be in the Defendants' camp, and the Plaintiffs could have called him if they wished.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Stated Case / Application in the Supreme Court of New South Wales From a Local Court Decision
Outcome
Application dismissed; stated case dismissed.
Legal Topics
['stated Case' 'jones V Dunkel Inference' 'failure to Call Witness' 'termite Inspection Report']
['civil Procedure' 'evidence'] ['stated Case' 'jones V Dunkel Inference' 'failure to Call Witness' 'termite Inspection Report']

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

Stated Case / Application in the Supreme Court of New South Wales From a Local Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Local Court Magistrate erred in failing to refer to or apply the principle in Jones -v- Dunkel concerning the Defendants' failure to call Mr. Weatherstone." "Whether an adverse inference should have been drawn that an opening in the brickwork exposing a termite nest existed at the time of the Defendants' inspection."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Magistrate did not commit an error warranting relief by failing to refer specifically to Jones -v- Dunkel, because the evidence said to show that Mr. Weatherstone could give conclusive evidence was hearsay and speculative, the Defendants had called evidence contradicting the Plaintiffs' inference, there was no material establishing what Mr. Weatherstone could say or that the Defendants feared to call him, he was not shown to be in the Defendants' camp, and the Plaintiffs could have called him if they wished.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; stated case dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The stated case is dismissed.']