NSW Caselaw
TANTEX INVESTMENTS PTY LIMITED v BIVIANO
SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES — COURT OF APPEAL
MEAGHER JA 9 August 1993
[1993] NSWCA 261
Meagher JA. In this matter, on 6 August 1993, Cohen J dismissed an application by Tantex Investments Pty Ltd against Mr and Mrs Biviano seeking, in the first place, an adjournment and, in the alternative, a continuation of an injunction.
His Honour dismissed both of these applications and the correctness of his Honour's reasons is now in dispute.
Tam content to say that I agree with his Honour's decision and with the reasons which his Honour advanced.
Leave to appeal from his Honour's judgment is now sought, not only on the basis of the material which was before his Honour on 6 August, but also on the basis of certain additional affidavits which it is sought to read before me. I permitted the reading of those affidavits, subject to objection, but, in my view, havingread them, I must come to the conclusion they are inadmissible. They do not comply with the standard rules about the admission of fresh evidence and that means, for the determination of the present application, I have to look at the matter on the basis that the evidence before the Court is the same evidence which was before Cohen J.
In these circumstances I regret to say that the present application must be dismissed with costs.
Orders accordingly.
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