Willoughby City Council v Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation (No. 2) [2008] NSWLEC 238

Willoughby City Council v Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation (No. 2) [2008] NSWLEC 238

The report was inadmissible because Mrs de Carvalho was not independent from the applicant, being its employee, was not independent from the matter in dispute because she had been heavily involved in the development proposal, and the report contained partisan opinions showing that she had adopted the role of an advocate for a party.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Objection to Admissibility of Expert Evidence / Ex Tempore Judgment on Objection to Tender of Expert Report
Outcome
Tender of the report rejected.
Legal Topics
['expert Evidence' 'admissibility' 'expert Witness Independence' 'overriding Duty to Assist the Court' 'employee Expert Witness']

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

Objection to Admissibility of Expert Evidence / Ex Tempore Judgment on Objection to Tender of Expert Report

  1. 1 ['Whether an expert report prepared by an employee of a party should be admitted as expert evidence.' 'Whether the witness was independent from the party and from the matter in dispute.' 'Whether the report contained partisan opinion and showed the witness had acted as an advocate for a party.']

Ratio Decidendi

The report was inadmissible because Mrs de Carvalho was not independent from the applicant, being its employee, was not independent from the matter in dispute because she had been heavily involved in the development proposal, and the report contained partisan opinions showing that she had adopted the role of an advocate for a party.

Court Disposition

Tender of the report rejected.

Orders

  • ['The tender of the report of Mrs Leonie de Carvalho is rejected.']