Clifford v Vegas Enterprises Pty Ltd (No 4) [2010] FCA 326

Clifford v Vegas Enterprises Pty Ltd (No 4) [2010] FCA 326

Leave was granted to the first respondent to call Mark Sutton as a witness and to rely on his witness statement as the evidence was relevant to matters in issue, the applicant had notice and was cross-examined on them, the oversight was not tactical, no clear prejudice to the applicant was demonstrated, and case management principles would not be disregarded by granting leave.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application During Trial
Outcome
Leave granted for first respondent to call Mark Sutton as a witness and rely on his witness statement.
Legal Topics
['case Management' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'late Service of Witness Statements']
['civil Procedure'] ['case Management' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'late Service of Witness Statements']

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 / Interlocutory Application During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to the first respondent to call Mark Sutton as a witness and rely on his late-served witness statement']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted to the first respondent to call Mark Sutton as a witness and to rely on his witness statement as the evidence was relevant to matters in issue, the applicant had notice and was cross-examined on them, the oversight was not tactical, no clear prejudice to the applicant was demonstrated, and case management principles would not be disregarded by granting leave.

Court Disposition

Leave granted for first respondent to call Mark Sutton as a witness and rely on his witness statement.

Orders

  • ['The first respondent have leave to call Mark Sutton as a witness in this proceeding and to rely on his witness statement annexed to the affidavit of Benjamin Dean Luscombe made 31 March 2010.']