X v Sydney Children's Hospitals Specialty Network & Anor (No 2) [2011] NSWSC 1317

X v Sydney Children's Hospitals Specialty Network & Anor (No 2) [2011] NSWSC 1317

Paragraph 8 of the statement is rejected because the Plaintiff's mother's belief is only marginally relevant, if at all, and its disputed nature may cloud the issues rather than assist the court.

Parties
Plaintiff: X; First Defendant: Sydney Children's Hospitals Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) (Incorporating The Royal Alexandra Hospital for Children); Second Defendant: Dr Brian Kearney
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
27 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Objection to Evidence
Outcome
Objection upheld; paragraph rejected
Legal Topics
Relevance of Party's Belief, Evidentiary Objection, Controversial Evidence
Practice and Procedure Relevance of Party's Belief Evidentiary Objection Controversial Evidence

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

X

Plaintiff

Sydney Children's Hospitals Specialty Network (Randwick and Westmead) (Incorporating The Royal Alexandra Hospital for Children)

First Defendant

Dr Brian Kearney

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Objection to Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the belief of the Plaintiff's mother as to specialty referral is relevant and admissible
  2. 2 Whether paragraph 8 of statement should be admitted

Ratio Decidendi

Paragraph 8 of the statement is rejected because the Plaintiff's mother's belief is only marginally relevant, if at all, and its disputed nature may cloud the issues rather than assist the court.

Court Disposition

Objection upheld; paragraph rejected

Orders

  • Paragraph 8 of the Plaintiff's mother's statement dated 09.10.01 is rejected.