Lewis v Nortex Pty Ltd (In Liq); Lamru Pty Ltd v Kation Pty Ltd [2002] NSWSC 337
The hard disk is admissible because, on the balance of probabilities, file 22 consists of a copy (though a copy of a copy) originating from a document maintained by the fourth defendant as at 28 June 1996, falling within the meaning and requirements of s 48(4) of the Evidence Act 1995, and its tender does not contradict the pleading particulars.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 19 April 2002
- Procedural Posture
- Equity / Interlocutory Application on Admissibility of Evidence
- Outcome
- Application for admission of computer hard disk as evidence granted.
- Legal Topics
- ['documentary Evidence' 'secondary Evidence' 'admissibility of Computer Records']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Equity / Interlocutory Application on Admissibility of Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether a computer hard disk containing a copy of a relevant computer file is admissible as evidence under s 48(4) of the Evidence Act 1995' 'Whether failure to tender originally pleaded exhibit prevents reliance on alternative copy' 'Whether admissibility can be refused due to absence of current printout of the file']
Ratio Decidendi
The hard disk is admissible because, on the balance of probabilities, file 22 consists of a copy (though a copy of a copy) originating from a document maintained by the fourth defendant as at 28 June 1996, falling within the meaning and requirements of s 48(4) of the Evidence Act 1995, and its tender does not contradict the pleading particulars.
Court Disposition
Application for admission of computer hard disk as evidence granted.
Orders
- ['Computer hard disk (hard disk containing computer file number 22) admitted into evidence.']
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