Oates v Hawkins (No 2) [2011] NSWSC 1005

Oates v Hawkins (No 2) [2011] NSWSC 1005

The application to vacate the hearing is dismissed because the grounds advanced by the defendants do not justify vacation: the court's schedule and the interests of all litigants require proceeding; the expert reports address matters in issue; potential prejudice to the defendants from late expert reports can be addressed by allowing additional time for their evidence and preparation; most of the plaintiff's expert evidence is properly considered as submissions, limiting potential prejudice.

Parties
Plaintiff: Tom Michael Oates; First Defendant: Garrick Michael Hawkins; Second Defendant: Scott Francis Tyne; Third Defendant: Consolidated Capital Ltd UK Company Number 4169970; Fourth Defendant: Credit and Commercial Finance Pty Ltd ACN 074 539 683; Fifth Defendant: Mrs Evelyn Hawkins; Sixth Defendant: Mrs Gillian Tyne; Seventh Defendant: Sea Power Holdings Limited; Eighth Defendant: Pegela Pty Ltd; Ninth Defendant: Consolidated Capital Services Pty Ltd ACN 096 516 808; Tenth Defendant: Matrix Group Limited (In Liq) ACN 061 549 371
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Application to Vacate Hearing/interlocutory Motion / Interlocutory
Outcome
Active defendants' motion to vacate hearing dismissed
Legal Topics
Interlocutory Applications, Expert Evidence, Vacation of Hearing Date
Civil Procedure Equity Interlocutory Applications Expert Evidence Vacation of Hearing Date

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tom Michael Oates

Plaintiff

Garrick Michael Hawkins

First Defendant

Scott Francis Tyne

Second Defendant

Consolidated Capital Ltd UK Company Number 4169970

Third Defendant

Credit and Commercial Finance Pty Ltd ACN 074 539 683

Fourth Defendant

Mrs Evelyn Hawkins

Fifth Defendant

Mrs Gillian Tyne

Sixth Defendant

Sea Power Holdings Limited

Seventh Defendant

Pegela Pty Ltd

Eighth Defendant

Consolidated Capital Services Pty Ltd ACN 096 516 808

Ninth Defendant

Matrix Group Limited (In Liq) ACN 061 549 371

Tenth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Application to Vacate Hearing/interlocutory Motion / Interlocutory

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the hearing date should be vacated due to service of expert reports by plaintiff
  2. 2 Whether expert reports are relevant in light of amendments to pleadings and prior rulings
  3. 3 Whether defendants have sufficient time to respond to expert reports

Ratio Decidendi

The application to vacate the hearing is dismissed because the grounds advanced by the defendants do not justify vacation: the court's schedule and the interests of all litigants require proceeding; the expert reports address matters in issue; potential prejudice to the defendants from late expert reports can be addressed by allowing additional time for their evidence and preparation; most of the plaintiff's expert evidence is properly considered as submissions, limiting potential prejudice.

Court Disposition

Active defendants' motion to vacate hearing dismissed

Orders

  • Active defendants' motion filed 31 August 2011 is dismissed