The City of Sydney v Streetscape Projects (Australia) Pty Limited & Anor [2011] NSWSC 1100

Supreme Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: The City of Sydney v Streetscape Projects (Australia) Pty Limited & Anor [2011] NSWSC 1100 Hearing dates: 1 August 2011, 12 September 2011 Decision date: 13 September 2011 Jurisdiction: Equity Division - Commercial List Before: Einstein J Decision: The Court disallows paragraphs 25 -36 of John McLeod's 27 July 2011 affidavit, including tabs 5 -15 and paragraph 8 and JAM -1 and JAM - 2 of Mr McLeod's 25 October 2010 affidavit. Catchwords: EVIDENCE - Rejection of evidence - Late service of evidence - Relevance to pleaded issue - Prejudice- Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Cases Cited: Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175 Autodesk v Dyson (No 2.) (1993) 176 CLR 300 Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: The City of Sydney (Plaintiff) Streetscape Projects (Australia) Pty Limited (First Defendant) Moses Edward Obeid (Second Defendant) Representation: Mr T Jucovic QC, Mr S Climpson, Mr C Bova (Plaintiff)

Mr S Couper QC, Mr J Gooley, Mr R Higgins (Defendants) Holding Redlich (Plaintiff) Colin Biggers & Paisley (Defendants) File Number(s): 2009/00298673 & 2010/0085353

Judgment

The current controversy 1Prior to the defendants calling Mr McLeod, a matter, which had been put on the backburner for some time, has re-emerged. The current controversy concerns the admissibility of paragraphs 25-33 of Mr McLeod's 27 July 2011 affidavit and a small number of sundry paragraphs which I deferred ruling on until today. 2As a number of earlier judgments, such as those given on 4 August 2011, 8 August 2011 and on 24 August 2011 have made plain, each and every occasion in which a party seeks an indulgence, in circumstances, which will inevitably result in an extensive hiatus, must be very carefully treated with. These considerations were treated with in Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175, referred to in some of the judgments already handed down during the extended period of this hearing.