TSAKOS v WOLMINA PTY LTD [1988] NSWCA 163

TSAKOS v WOLMINA PTY LTD [1988] NSWCA 163

Adjournment should be granted to ensure appellant can place important evidence before the Court, but costs occasioned by the adjournment must be paid by the appellant due to inadequate preparation and late application.

Parties
Appellant: Tsakos; Respondent: Wolmina Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 August 1988
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Adjournment and Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Outcome
adjournment granted; costs to be paid by appellant
Legal Topics
Adjournment, Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal, Costs
Practice and Procedure Adjournment Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal Costs

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tsakos

Appellant

Wolmina Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Adjournment and Admission of Fresh Evidence on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should adjourn the hearing to enable the appellant to adduce fresh evidence on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the appellant has provided adequate explanation for failure to tender evidence at trial and the circumstances of discovery
  3. 3 Whether costs should be awarded for the adjournment

Ratio Decidendi

Adjournment should be granted to ensure appellant can place important evidence before the Court, but costs occasioned by the adjournment must be paid by the appellant due to inadequate preparation and late application.

Court Disposition

adjournment granted; costs to be paid by appellant

Orders

  • Hearing adjourned.
  • Matter listed before the Registrar to fix a fresh date for hearing.