Jiang v Quach [2000] NSWCA 147

Jiang v Quach [2000] NSWCA 147

The appeal failed because the proposed fresh evidence was inadmissible, the trial judge was entitled to prefer the respondent's sworn evidence over hearsay and equivocal material and was not shown to have erred in finding that the appellant had not proved any purchase of urea by Semvilar, and the refusal to issue...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Claim for Commission in the Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
['claim for Commission' 'fresh Evidence on Appeal' 'hearsay Evidence' 'business Records Exception' 'subpoena' 'appellate Review of Factual Findings']
['contract Law' 'evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'appellate Procedure'] ['claim for Commission' 'fresh Evidence on Appeal' 'hearsay Evidence' 'business Records Exception' 'subpoena' 'appellate Review of Factual Findings']

Source-derived case record

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 Appeal / Appeal From Dismissal of Claim for Commission in the Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should receive additional evidence consisting of documents from Agro Chim Export and translations.' "Whether the trial judge erred in accepting the respondent's sworn denial that Semvilar purchased urea over the appellant's hearsay and admission evidence." 'Whether the trial judge erred in refusing leave to issue a subpoena to Agro Chim Export.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the proposed fresh evidence was inadmissible, the trial judge was entitled to prefer the respondent's sworn evidence over hearsay and equivocal material and was not shown to have erred in finding that the appellant had not proved any purchase of urea by Semvilar, and the refusal to issue the subpoena was a sound discretionary decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed with costs.']