Federal Court of Australia
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Barton v Lake Macquarie City Council [2014] FCA 1103 Citation: Barton v Lake Macquarie City Council [2014] FCA 1103
Parties: KATE BARTON v LAKE MACQUARIE CITY COUNCIL
File number: NSD 140 of 2013
Judge: KATZMANN J
Date of judgment: 13 October 2014
Catchwords: EVIDENCE – expert reports tendered by applicant as evidence in reply – whether expert reports relevant – whether expert reports properly evidence in reply – whether evidence usurps the function of the judge in determining the issues in dispute – whether it would be unfairly prejudicial to the respondent to use the evidence WORDS AND PHRASES – "unfairly prejudicial"
Legislation: Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) ss 55, 56, 80, 136 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (Cth) ss 4, 5, 6, 11 15 Australian Law Reform Commission, Evidence (Interim), Report No 26 (1985)
Cases cited: Addenbrooke Pty Limited v Duncan (No 5) [2014] FCA 625 Fulham Partners LLC v National Australia Bank Ltd [2013] NSWCA 296 Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles (2001) 52 NSWLR 705 Ordukaya v Hicks [2000] NSWCA 180 R v GK (2001) 53 NSWLR 317
Date of hearing: 10 October 2014
Place: Sydney
Division: GENERAL DIVISION
Category: CATCHWORDS
Number of paragraphs: 51
Counsel for the Applicant: Ms K Edwards with Ms N Case
Solicitor for the Applicant: Paul Murphy & Associates
Counsel for the Respondent: Ms C Ronalds SC with Ms B Tronson
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate