Kincaid v. Aer Lingus Teoranta [2003] IESC 31 (9 May 2003)

Kincaid v. Aer Lingus Teoranta [2003] IESC 31 (9 May 2003)

A party is not obliged to furnish an expert report listed in its schedule if it subsequently decides not to call that expert as a witness; the report remains privileged and need not be disclosed.

Citation
[2003] IESC 31
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Maria Kincaid; Defendant/appellant: Aer Lingus Teoranta
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
09 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside.
Legal Topics
Disclosure of Expert Reports, Privilege in Litigation, Interpretation of Court Rules
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Disclosure of Expert Reports Privilege in Litigation Interpretation of Court Rules

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maria Kincaid

Plaintiff/respondent

Aer Lingus Teoranta

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a party is obliged to furnish an expert report listed in its schedule if it subsequently decides not to call that expert as a witness
  2. 2 Interpretation of Order 39, Rule 46(6) of the Rules of the Superior Courts

Ratio Decidendi

A party is not obliged to furnish an expert report listed in its schedule if it subsequently decides not to call that expert as a witness; the report remains privileged and need not be disclosed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside.