TB and DC v State of New South Wales & Anor [2014] NSWSC 1145

TB and DC v State of New South Wales & Anor [2014] NSWSC 1145

The specific history of what occurred at the mediation was unsupported by direct testimony, TB would not give evidence of the matters recorded, and the material was unnecessary to understand Dr Diamond's unchallenged opinion. It was therefore not relevant for a purpose other than proof of the asserted fact, and the Ramsay v Watson rule survived the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Ex Tempore Judgment on Objection to Paragraphs in an Expert Medical Report Tendered by the Plaintiffs
Outcome
Defendants' objection upheld; paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 on page 2 of the report of 9 June 2013 rejected.
Legal Topics
['admissibility of Expert Opinion Evidence' 'medical Report History' 'hearsay' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) Ss 60 and 136' 'ramsay V Watson Rule']
['evidence'] ['admissibility of Expert Opinion Evidence' 'medical Report History' 'hearsay' 'evidence Act 1995 (nsw) Ss 60 and 136' 'ramsay V Watson Rule']

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 Application / Ex Tempore Judgment on Objection to Paragraphs in an Expert Medical Report Tendered by the Plaintiffs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether paragraphs in Dr Michael Diamond's report recording TB's history of her symptomatic response to attending a mediation should be admitted where there was no evidence to support the history." 'Whether the common law rule in Ramsay v Watson survives the enactment of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).' 'Whether the history was relevant for a purpose other than proof of the asserted fact so as to engage s 60 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).']

Ratio Decidendi

The specific history of what occurred at the mediation was unsupported by direct testimony, TB would not give evidence of the matters recorded, and the material was unnecessary to understand Dr Diamond's unchallenged opinion. It was therefore not relevant for a purpose other than proof of the asserted fact, and the Ramsay v Watson rule survived the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Defendants' objection upheld; paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 on page 2 of the report of 9 June 2013 rejected.

Orders

  • ['I reject paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 on page 2 of the report of 9th June 2013.']