WILLING V. CUTTEN & HARVEY

WILLING V. CUTTEN & HARVEY

The majority held that, although the trial judge erred as to the year of a key alibi and excluded certain clarificatory evidence, the judge's assessment of the principal witness's (Derrington) credibility was such that, even without error, the judgment would not have differed; thus, the appeal should be dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Willing; Respondent: Cutten & Harvey (Reg.)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 1976
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to High Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs (by majority)
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Credibility of Witnesses, Burden of Proof, Appeals Procedure
Contract Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Credibility of Witnesses Burden of Proof Appeals Procedure

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Willing

Appellant

Cutten & Harvey (Reg.)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge's misapprehension as to a witness's evidence warranted a new trial
  2. 2 Whether the judge's errors as to admissibility and understanding of evidence affected the verdict

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that, although the trial judge erred as to the year of a key alibi and excluded certain clarificatory evidence, the judge's assessment of the principal witness's (Derrington) credibility was such that, even without error, the judgment would not have differed; thus, the appeal should be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs (by majority)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs