Touma v Diocese of Saint Maron, Sydney [2020] NSWSC 1926

Touma v Diocese of Saint Maron, Sydney [2020] NSWSC 1926

The order was made because Father Sleiman Yammine was a critical witness being called in the first defendant's case, audio-visual link evidence was an accepted method of giving evidence, the plaintiff would not be placed at a comparative disadvantage, there was no evidence that giving evidence from Lebanon created a greater integrity risk than other remote evidence, and COVID-related travel, quarantine and flight restrictions made attendance in Australia likely to be very difficult. The plaintiff's concerns about the second defendant not submitting to the jurisdiction did not outweigh the interests of justice favouring the order.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil Procedure Application for Witness to Give Evidence by Audio Visual Link / Notice of Motion Filed 17 December 2020 Determined on 24 December 2020
Outcome
Application granted.
Legal Topics
['audio Visual Link Evidence' 'witness Evidence From Overseas' 'interests of Justice' 'covid 19 Remote Hearings']
['civil Procedure' 'evidence'] ['audio Visual Link Evidence' 'witness Evidence From Overseas' 'interests of Justice' 'covid 19 Remote Hearings']

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 Procedure Application for Witness to Give Evidence by Audio Visual Link / Notice of Motion Filed 17 December 2020 Determined on 24 December 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should permit Father Sleiman Yammine to give oral evidence by audio-visual link from Lebanon pursuant to r 31.3 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW).' "Whether permitting audio-visual link evidence was in the interests of justice where the witness was the second defendant, had not submitted to the jurisdiction, and was being called in the first defendant's case."]

Ratio Decidendi

The order was made because Father Sleiman Yammine was a critical witness being called in the first defendant's case, audio-visual link evidence was an accepted method of giving evidence, the plaintiff would not be placed at a comparative disadvantage, there was no evidence that giving evidence from Lebanon created a greater integrity risk than other remote evidence, and COVID-related travel, quarantine and flight restrictions made attendance in Australia likely to be very difficult. The plaintiff's concerns about the second defendant not submitting to the jurisdiction did not outweigh the interests of justice favouring the order.

Court Disposition

Application granted.

Orders

  • ['Pursuant to r 31.3 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), Father Sleiman Yammine is permitted to give evidence by way of audio-visual link.']