Chelva v Brodyn [2005] NSWSC 701

Chelva v Brodyn [2005] NSWSC 701

The referee's report was supported by the evidence and his expert reasoning, having explained his process and properly considered the submissions and evidence from both parties; thus, the Court should adopt the report in full as there was no basis to require a more detailed scientific measurement process or further reference.

Parties
Plaintiff/applicant: Chelva Holdings Pty Limited; Defendant/respondent: Brodyn Pty Limited
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Reference Under Part 72 of the Supreme Court Rules / Hearing of Defendant's Motion for Partial Adoption of Referee's Report
Outcome
Report adopted
Legal Topics
Reference Procedure, Adoption of Referee's Report, Expert Determination
Construction Law Civil Procedure Reference Procedure Adoption of Referee's Report Expert Determination

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chelva Holdings Pty Limited

Plaintiff/applicant

Brodyn Pty Limited

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Reference Under Part 72 of the Supreme Court Rules / Hearing of Defendant's Motion for Partial Adoption of Referee's Report

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the referee adopted an appropriate method for determining the reference under Part 72 of the Supreme Court Rules
  2. 2 Whether the referee's reasoning process and choice of evidence was valid for the Court to adopt his report

Ratio Decidendi

The referee's report was supported by the evidence and his expert reasoning, having explained his process and properly considered the submissions and evidence from both parties; thus, the Court should adopt the report in full as there was no basis to require a more detailed scientific measurement process or further reference.

Court Disposition

Report adopted

Orders

  • The Court adopts the determination of Mr Lloyd Austin dated 2 May 2005 being Exhibit A before me.