O'Reilly v Western Sussex NHS Trust (No.5) [2014] NSWSC 555

O'Reilly v Western Sussex NHS Trust (No.5) [2014] NSWSC 555

Leave to reopen was refused because the defendants sought to tender evidence on a central issue during final oral submissions, some four months after the conclusion of evidence, despite having possessed the Death Certificate since 22 March 2011 and giving no affidavit or other explanation; admitting the evidence at that late stage would cause significant prejudice, cost, expense and additional anxiety to the plaintiff and was not required by the interests or dictates of justice.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Application by Defendants for Leave to Reopen Their Case to Tender Additional Evidence / Course of Final Oral Submissions, Four Months After Conclusion of Evidence
Outcome
Application by defendants to reopen proceedings refused.
Legal Topics
['leave to Reopen Case' 'tender of Additional Evidence' 'overriding Purpose' 'interests of Justice' 'prejudice, Cost and Expense']
['civil Procedure'] ['leave to Reopen Case' 'tender of Additional Evidence' 'overriding Purpose' 'interests of Justice' 'prejudice, Cost and Expense']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application by Defendants for Leave to Reopen Their Case to Tender Additional Evidence / Course of Final Oral Submissions, Four Months After Conclusion of Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the defendants should be granted leave to reopen their case to tender the contents of the Death Certificate of the late Dr O'Reilly after the conclusion of evidence." 'Whether permitting the additional evidence at the stage of final submissions would be in the interests of justice and consistent with the overriding purpose of the Civil Procedure Act 2005.' 'Whether adducing the additional evidence would cause prejudice, cost and expense to the plaintiff.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to reopen was refused because the defendants sought to tender evidence on a central issue during final oral submissions, some four months after the conclusion of evidence, despite having possessed the Death Certificate since 22 March 2011 and giving no affidavit or other explanation; admitting the evidence at that late stage would cause significant prejudice, cost, expense and additional anxiety to the plaintiff and was not required by the interests or dictates of justice.

Court Disposition

Application by defendants to reopen proceedings refused.

Orders

  • ['The application is dismissed.']