Crago, Peter & Anor v Multiquip Pty Ltd & Anor [1996] FCA 1175
The proposed expert evidence was plainly relevant to the efficacy of the machinery in issue, was not previously available in the same form to the applicants, and included evidence from an expert who had been able to examine and test unmodified machines; despite potential additional time, cost and disruption, the Court should permit the applicants to lead it.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 02 December 1996
- Procedural Posture
- Motion Seeking Leave to Adduce Expert Evidence / Interlocutory Motion
- Outcome
- Applicants granted leave to adduce the expert evidence.
- Legal Topics
- ['leave to Adduce Expert Evidence' 'expert Evidence' 'discretion to Admit Evidence' 'efficient Use of Courts']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Motion Seeking Leave to Adduce Expert Evidence / Interlocutory Motion
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the applicants should be permitted to adduce expert evidence from Dr John Blackmore and Dr Douglas Black concerning the efficacy of the machines in issue.']
Ratio Decidendi
The proposed expert evidence was plainly relevant to the efficacy of the machinery in issue, was not previously available in the same form to the applicants, and included evidence from an expert who had been able to examine and test unmodified machines; despite potential additional time, cost and disruption, the Court should permit the applicants to lead it.
Court Disposition
Applicants granted leave to adduce the expert evidence.
Orders
- ['The applicants may call Dr John Blackmore and Dr Douglas Black.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment