Kon v AMP Life Ltd [2006] NSWSC 957

Kon v AMP Life Ltd [2006] NSWSC 957

Dispensation from the pre-trial direction was granted because the evidence in question could not assist the plaintiff's preparation, and disclosure prior to cross-examination of the plaintiff posed a risk of tailoring evidence, which the interests of justice require to be avoided if possible.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Pre Trial Application for Dispensation From Pre Trial Direction
Outcome
Dispensation from pre-trial direction granted to the defendant regarding service of specified affidavit evidence.
Legal Topics
['pre Trial Directions' 'affidavit Evidence' 'fair Trial' 'procedural Fairness']
['civil Procedure'] ['pre Trial Directions' 'affidavit Evidence' 'fair Trial' 'procedural Fairness']

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

Civil / Pre Trial Application for Dispensation From Pre Trial Direction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendant should be granted dispensation from the pre-trial direction to serve affidavit evidence by a set date for specified documents.']

Ratio Decidendi

Dispensation from the pre-trial direction was granted because the evidence in question could not assist the plaintiff's preparation, and disclosure prior to cross-examination of the plaintiff posed a risk of tailoring evidence, which the interests of justice require to be avoided if possible.

Court Disposition

Dispensation from pre-trial direction granted to the defendant regarding service of specified affidavit evidence.

Orders

  • ['The defendant is granted relief from the order made on 3 February 2006 requiring service of affidavit evidence by 1 March 2006, in respect of the documents in the sealed envelope.' 'The sealed envelope containing the documents is to be retained on the court file and not opened without the leave of a judge.']