Szeto v Situ (No 2) [2017] NSWCA 138

Szeto v Situ (No 2) [2017] NSWCA 138

The appellant failed to show why the evidence sought to be adduced by subpoenas could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence at trial, would probably lead to a different verdict, or is credible; therefore, the Notices of Motion were dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Livy Szeto; Respondent: Liming Situ
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Consequential Orders (other Than Costs)
Outcome
Notices of Motion dismissed

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 1 Party arguments 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Livy Szeto

Appellant

Liming Situ

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Consequential Orders (other Than Costs)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to issue subpoenas to adduce further evidence on appeal.

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant failed to show why the evidence sought to be adduced by subpoenas could not have been obtained with reasonable diligence at trial, would probably lead to a different verdict, or is credible; therefore, the Notices of Motion were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Notices of Motion dismissed

Orders

  • Notices of Motion dated 20 March 2017, 1 May 2017 and 3 May 2017 dismissed.