TANYA LEONHARDT v LOUISE HOSFORD [2010] NSWDC 338

New South Wales District Court

CITATION: TANYA LEONHARDT v LOUISE HOSFORD [2010] NSWDC 338

JUDGMENT DATE: 26 May 2010

JURISDICTION: District Court of New South Wales

JUDGMENT OF: Cogswell SC DCJ

DECISION: I am not satisfied there are exceptional circumstances and I reject the tender.

CATCHWORDS: CIVIL LAW - admissibility of psychologist's report - plaintiff objection to opinion contained in report - report not served in time - test whether there are exceptional circumstances warranting the granting of leave to waive the requirements of service within time

LEGISLATION CITED: Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005, 31.18, 31.28

PARTIES: Tanya Leonhardt Louise Hosford

FILE NUMBER(S): 2007/294929

COUNSEL: Mr AJ Lidden SC for the plaintiff Mr AJJ Renshaw for the defendant

JUDGMENT

1. Mr Renshaw, counsel for the defendant in these proceedings, tenders a report by a psychologist, Dr Fox. The report was produced relating to proceedings other than these proceedings. Mr Lidden S.C. who appears for the plaintiff does not object to the tendering of material contained in the report which amounts to history given by his client but does object to it being tendered for any opinion expressed in it. Mr Lidden relies in his objection on P 31 R 28 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005. His point simply is that the report was not served in time.

2. I am of the opinion that the report tendered by Mr Renshaw does fall within the definition of expert's report contained in UCPR 31.18 because the expert does not have to be an expert in these proceedings. Mr Renshaw does not submit that the report was served within time in accordance with the UCPR. He therefore must argue, as he does, that in accordance with UCPR 31.28(4)(a) there are "exceptional circumstances that warrant the granting of leave". I should add he does not rely on cl (b) of that provision.