Rhiannon Rigby v Shellharbour City Council & Anor [2003] NSWSC 906

Rhiannon Rigby v Shellharbour City Council & Anor [2003] NSWSC 906

Dr Bell's further report was related to and supplemented his earlier report because it considered psychological testing recommended in the earlier report and confirmed his earlier opinions. By tendering the earlier report and calling Dr Bell as a witness, the plaintiff waived privilege over the further report to the extent it concerned the relevant issues. The report also fell within SCR Pt 36 r 13C(3), requiring service of a supplementary report. However, the first paragraph on page 6 contained advice on how the plaintiff's lawyers might conduct the case and its disclosure would be highly prejudicial, so production of that paragraph was excluded under Evidence Act 1995 s 26(b).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 October 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceedings / Trial Ruling on Production of an Expert's Supplementary Report During Cross Examination
Outcome
Dr Bell's supplementary report was ordered to be produced to the defendants except for the first paragraph on page 6.
Legal Topics
['production of Documents' 'waiver of Client Legal Privilege' 'expert Witness Reports' 'supplementary Expert Reports' 'expert Witness Code of Conduct' 'cross Examination of Expert Witnesses']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'client Legal Privilege' 'expert Evidence'] ['production of Documents' 'waiver of Client Legal Privilege' 'expert Witness Reports' 'supplementary Expert Reports' 'expert Witness Code of Conduct' 'cross Examination of Expert Witnesses']

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 Proceedings / Trial Ruling on Production of an Expert's Supplementary Report During Cross Examination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether Dr Bell's further report of 29 September 2003 was protected by client legal privilege under Evidence Act 1995 s 119." "Whether any privilege in the further report was waived by tendering Dr Bell's earlier report and calling him as a witness." 'Whether SCR Pt 36 r 13C(3) required service and production of the supplementary report.' "Whether the paragraph advising the plaintiff's lawyers on conduct of the case should be produced to the defendants."]

Ratio Decidendi

Dr Bell's further report was related to and supplemented his earlier report because it considered psychological testing recommended in the earlier report and confirmed his earlier opinions. By tendering the earlier report and calling Dr Bell as a witness, the plaintiff waived privilege over the further report to the extent it concerned the relevant issues. The report also fell within SCR Pt 36 r 13C(3), requiring service of a supplementary report. However, the first paragraph on page 6 contained advice on how the plaintiff's lawyers might conduct the case and its disclosure would be highly prejudicial, so production of that paragraph was excluded under Evidence Act 1995 s 26(b).

Court Disposition

Dr Bell's supplementary report was ordered to be produced to the defendants except for the first paragraph on page 6.

Orders

  • ["Dr Bell's report of 29 September 2003, save and except the first paragraph on page 6, be produced." 'Access to the report, except for the excluded paragraph, was granted to the other parties in the case.' 'A copy of the report was to be marked for identification 9.']