Sydney Attractions Group Pty Ltd v Schulman [2012] NSWSC 951

Sydney Attractions Group Pty Ltd v Schulman [2012] NSWSC 951

It was appropriate in the interests of the efficient disposition of the proceedings to consider the defendant's expert reports before trial because there were serious questions as to the admissibility of large portions of some reports and no point in experts conferring on matters that were irrelevant or could not be proved. However, some objections, especially those turning on the construction of clause 13.9 of the Deed, relevance, unproved assumptions, specialised knowledge, and detailed reasoning defects, should not finally be determined at this preliminary stage and would be addressed through preliminary rulings, limitations, later submissions, cross-examination, or reconsideration...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications / Notice of Motion Seeking Advance Rulings Under S 192 a of the Evidence Act 1995 on Admissibility of Defendant's Expert Evidence Before a Three Week Hearing Listed to Commence on 19 November 2012
Outcome
Advance rulings given, with preliminary rulings to be circulated and further submissions to be heard on objections to the expert reports.
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'advance Rulings on Admissibility' 'share Sale Deed' 'deferred Component' 'earn Out Period' 'good Faith Obligations' 'proof of Expert Assumptions']
['evidence' 'civil Procedure' 'commercial Law'] ['expert Evidence' 'advance Rulings on Admissibility' 'share Sale Deed' 'deferred Component' 'earn Out Period' 'good Faith Obligations' 'proof of Expert Assumptions']

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

Interlocutory Applications / Notice of Motion Seeking Advance Rulings Under S 192 a of the Evidence Act 1995 on Admissibility of Defendant's Expert Evidence Before a Three Week Hearing Listed to Commence on 19 November 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether it was appropriate to make advance rulings under s 192A of the Evidence Act 1995 on the admissibility of expert reports served by the defendant.' 'Whether expert opinions that assumed or stated constructions of the Share Sale Deed should be excluded or admitted on a limited basis.' 'Whether objections based on relevance, unproved assumptions, specialised knowledge, and reasoning defects should be determined before trial.']

Ratio Decidendi

It was appropriate in the interests of the efficient disposition of the proceedings to consider the defendant's expert reports before trial because there were serious questions as to the admissibility of large portions of some reports and no point in experts conferring on matters that were irrelevant or could not be proved. However, some objections, especially those turning on the construction of clause 13.9 of the Deed, relevance, unproved assumptions, specialised knowledge, and detailed reasoning defects, should not finally be determined at this preliminary stage and would be addressed through preliminary rulings, limitations, later submissions, cross-examination, or reconsideration...

Court Disposition

Advance rulings given, with preliminary rulings to be circulated and further submissions to be heard on objections to the expert reports.

Orders

  • ['The Court will circulate preliminary rulings on objections to the reports of Mr Blythe, Professor Carmichael, Mr Boundy and Ms Bensley and invite submissions on those rulings.' 'At a time convenient to Counsel, the Court will hear submissions as to the preliminary rulings and, as appropriate, make directions as to...