Gorczynski v Perera & Dee & Ors (No. 2) [2003] NSWLEC 149

Gorczynski v Perera & Dee & Ors (No. 2) [2003] NSWLEC 149

There are no grounds to refuse leave to rely upon Professor Mackay's affidavit; the council is entitled to rely on its chosen expert. The hearing dates remain fixed, but cross-examination of Professor Mackay and evidence in reply may be postponed to later dates to ensure fairness to the applicant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Notice of motion refused in part; hearing dates confirmed; provision for postponement and costs reserved.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Affidavit' 'vacation of Hearing Dates']

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

Notice of Motion / Interlocutory Application

  1. 1 ['Whether the third respondent should be refused leave to rely on the affidavit of Professor Richard Mackay' 'Whether the hearing dates should be vacated']

Ratio Decidendi

There are no grounds to refuse leave to rely upon Professor Mackay's affidavit; the council is entitled to rely on its chosen expert. The hearing dates remain fixed, but cross-examination of Professor Mackay and evidence in reply may be postponed to later dates to ensure fairness to the applicant.

Court Disposition

Notice of motion refused in part; hearing dates confirmed; provision for postponement and costs reserved.

Orders

  • ['The first order stated in the notice of motion is refused.' 'The hearing dates fixed for 11 November 2002, 13 November 2002 and 14 November 2002 are confirmed.' 'The dates of 3 February 2003 to 7 February 2003 will be the dates for the continuation of the hearing if required.' "The dates of 2 December 2002, 3...