NSW Caselaw
Court of Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Bitar Pty Ltd v Hebbel Constructions Pty Ltd [2019] NSWCA 39 Hearing dates: 20 February 2019 Date of orders: 05 March 2019 Decision date: 05 March 2019 Before: Gleeson JA at [1]; McCallum JA at [44]. Decision: (1) Summons seeking leave to appeal dismissed.
(2) Applicant pay the respondent's costs of the summons. Catchwords: APPEAL – Leave to appeal from interlocutory decision adopting referee reports – where applicant afforded opportunity to make submissions to referee and had not done so – whether manifest injustice in primary judge not considering afresh questions of fact decided by the referee
EVIDENCE – Discretions – Exclusion of evidence – Civil proceedings – refusal of admission of late material – where primary judge had regard to unexplained delay and case management principles – restraint in reviewing discretionary decision concerning question of practice and procedure Legislation Cited: Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), ss 56, 57, 58, 59 Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW), s 101(2)(e) Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW), r 20.24 Cases Cited: Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc (1981) 148 CLR 170; [1981] HCA 39 Aon Risk Services Australia Ltd v Australian National University (2009) 239 CLR 175; [2009] HCA 27 Chocolate Factory Apartments Pty Ltd v Westpoint Finance Pty Ltd [2005] NSWSC 784 Flender (Aust) Pty Ltd v Warman International Ltd (Court of Appeal (NSW), 7 and 18 August 1997, 19 June 1998, unrep) House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 In the Will of F B Gilbert (1946) 46 SR(NSW) 318 Mainteck Services Pty Ltd v Stein Heurtey SA (2014) 89 NSWLR 633; [2014] NSWCA 184 Nine Network Pty Ltd v Kennedy Miller Television Pty Ltd (Court of Appeal (NSW), 6 May 1994, unrep) Rich v Westpac Banking Corporation [2014] NSWCA 136 Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services v Smith (2017) 95 NSWLR 597; [2017] NSWCA 206 Westpoint Management Ltd v Chocolate Factory Apartments Ltd [2007] NSWCA 253 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Bitar Pty Limited (Applicant) Hebbel Constructions Pty Limited (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: P E King (Applicant) P Wiggins (Solicitor) (Respondent)
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