NSW Caselaw
Land and Environment Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: Chief Executive, Office of Environment and Heritage v Kyluk Pty Limited [2012] NSWLEC 22 Hearing dates: 16 - 17 February 2012 Decision date: 20 February 2012 Jurisdiction: Class 5 Before: Pain J Decision: The reports of Mr Tulau and Ms James the subject of the voir dire are admissible. Catchwords: CRIMINAL - voir dire on admissibility of evidence - expert reports - application of Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 Sch 7 "Expert witness code of conduct" - reports admissible Legislation Cited: Evidence Act 1995 s 56, s 79 Land and Environment Court Rules 2007 Pt 5 r 5.1, r 5.2 National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 s 118A(2) Supreme Court Rules 1970 Pt 75 r 3J Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 Sch 1 Pt 3 Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 Pt 31 r 31.23, r 31.27, Sch 7 Cases Cited: Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar [2011] HCA 21; (2011) 277 ALR 611 Makita (Australia) Pty Ltd v Sprowles [2001] NSWCA 305; (2001) 52 NSWLR 705 R v RTB [2002] NSWCCA 104 R v Skaf [2004] NSWCCA 74 Texts Cited: B Craze et al, Soil testing procedures Department of Conservation and Land Management Category: Procedural and other rulings Parties: Chief Executive, Office of Environment and Heritage (Prosecutor) Kyluk Pty Limited (Defendant) Representation: Mr J Glissan QC (Prosecutor) Mr S Littlemore QC with Ms P Lane (Defendant) Office of Environment and Heritage (Prosecutor) McGirr James Hall (Defendant) File Number(s): 50604 of 2011
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