Ditchfield v Local Government Engineering Services Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1107

Ditchfield v Local Government Engineering Services Pty Ltd [2022] NSWSC 1107

Applying s 56 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005, it would be inimical to the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues to require further sequential reports before the geotechnical experts addressed causation and rectification questions in conclave. The proposed questions were largely directed to real issues in dispute and should be allowed, subject to amendments removing matters outside expertise or of limited utility, including certain requests for percentage confidence and specified subquestions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Procedural Ruling in Negligence Proceedings / Pre Trial Dispute About Proposed Questions for a Joint Conclave of Geotechnical Experts
Outcome
Most proposed questions were permitted to go to the geotechnical experts' conclave, subject to specified amendments and exclusions; the plaintiffs were directed to prepare revised questions and costs were ordered to be costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['expert Conclaves' 'questions for Experts' 'case Management' 'objective of Just, Quick and Cheap Resolution' 'rectification and Demolition Damages']
['civil Procedure' 'expert Evidence' 'negligence' 'building and Construction'] ['expert Conclaves' 'questions for Experts' 'case Management' 'objective of Just, Quick and Cheap Resolution' 'rectification and Demolition Damages']

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

Procedural Ruling in Negligence Proceedings / Pre Trial Dispute About Proposed Questions for a Joint Conclave of Geotechnical Experts

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiffs' proposed questions concerning causation, remediation and rectification should be put to the geotechnical experts in conclave." "Whether the defendant's geotechnical expert would be unfairly disadvantaged by answering questions before the plaintiffs served a reply report from their geotechnical expert." 'Whether particular proposed questions should be amended or excluded because of expertise, usefulness or tendency to cause delay.']

Ratio Decidendi

Applying s 56 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005, it would be inimical to the just, quick and cheap resolution of the real issues to require further sequential reports before the geotechnical experts addressed causation and rectification questions in conclave. The proposed questions were largely directed to real issues in dispute and should be allowed, subject to amendments removing matters outside expertise or of limited utility, including certain requests for percentage confidence and specified subquestions.

Court Disposition

Most proposed questions were permitted to go to the geotechnical experts' conclave, subject to specified amendments and exclusions; the plaintiffs were directed to prepare revised questions and costs were ordered to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['The plaintiffs are to prepare a revised set of questions for the conclave that reflect the reasons and serve it on the defendants on or before 5pm on 12 August 2022.' 'Costs are costs in the cause.']