Perry v Kinnear & Ors (No. 3) [2020] NSWDC 899

Perry v Kinnear & Ors (No. 3) [2020] NSWDC 899

The questions relating to Brock Kinnear's character were allowable because the defendants had put the character of the family environment in issue through cross-examination of the plaintiff, and the proposed evidence, if accepted, could rationally affect the assessment of facts in issue concerning the alleged sexual conduct of the first defendant and the ancillary pleaded case against the second defendant. The evidence was therefore relevant under s 55 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and generally admissible under s 56.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedural Ruling on Defendants' Objection to Plaintiff's Proposed Cross Examination of Witness Brock Kinnear
Outcome
Objection dismissed; the proposed questions were allowed.
Legal Topics
['objection to Cross Examination' 'relevance' 'admissibility of Oral Evidence' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) Ss 55 56']
['civil Practice and Procedure' 'evidence'] ['objection to Cross Examination' 'relevance' 'admissibility of Oral Evidence' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) Ss 55 56']

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 / Procedural Ruling on Defendants' Objection to Plaintiff's Proposed Cross Examination of Witness Brock Kinnear

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the plaintiff's proposed questions to Brock Kinnear relating to character were relevant." 'Whether the proposed questions were inadmissible as badgering, cruel or only for the purpose of unsettling the witness.' 'Whether the defendants had put the character of the family environment in issue so as to make the proposed cross-examination open.']

Ratio Decidendi

The questions relating to Brock Kinnear's character were allowable because the defendants had put the character of the family environment in issue through cross-examination of the plaintiff, and the proposed evidence, if accepted, could rationally affect the assessment of facts in issue concerning the alleged sexual conduct of the first defendant and the ancillary pleaded case against the second defendant. The evidence was therefore relevant under s 55 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and generally admissible under s 56.

Court Disposition

Objection dismissed; the proposed questions were allowed.

Orders

  • ['I allow the questions of Brock Kinnear relating to character, as submitted by counsel for the plaintiff.']