Steven Jelic v Edward Bader and Gerardina Bader [2010] NSWDC 166

Steven Jelic v Edward Bader and Gerardina Bader [2010] NSWDC 166

The author of the report is qualified to express views; the report is admissible except for the footnotes referencing unavailable material. Issues relating to the articulation of those views and the availability of referenced material go more to weight than admissibility.

Parties
Plaintiff: Steven Jelic; Defendant: Edward Bader; Defendant: Gerardina Bader
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil / Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome
report admissible except for the footnotes
Legal Topics
Objection to Expert Report, Admissibility of Evidence, Expertise of Author, Availability of Material Referred to in Report, Weight Vs Admissibility
Civil Law Objection to Expert Report Admissibility of Evidence Expertise of Author Availability of Material Referred to in Report Weight Vs Admissibility

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven Jelic

Plaintiff

Edward Bader

Defendant

Gerardina Bader

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the author of the expert report is qualified to express the views contained in the report
  2. 2 Whether the material referred to in the report's footnotes affects admissibility

Ratio Decidendi

The author of the report is qualified to express views; the report is admissible except for the footnotes referencing unavailable material. Issues relating to the articulation of those views and the availability of referenced material go more to weight than admissibility.

Court Disposition

report admissible except for the footnotes

Orders

  • The report is admissible, with the exception of the footnotes.