Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
High Court, in family law proceedings, rules that the appellant ought to be allowed to call the evidence of an expert, despite objections that this would amount to fresh evidence and put the respondent at a disadvantage, on the grounds that: appeals from the Circuit Court to the High Court have been dealt with as hearings de novo; and the Court is not aware of any authority, nor has any authority been put before it, which would indicate that evidence such as that proposed to be called on behalf of the appellant should not be allowed.
Ex tempore judgment - objection has arisen at the outset of this appeal concerning the calling of evidence arising from the report prepared by Dr. L. - question concerning the difference, if one exists, between the procedure in respect of appeals from the Circuit Court to the High Court as opposed to appeals from the High Court to the Court of Appeal and to the Supreme Court - solicitors for respondent pointed out that report contained information from emails and medical notes - this information was not asked of their client - correspondence between parties in this regard - appellants solicitors wrote to the respondent solicitors seeking that they issue a motion setting out that for reasons outside the control of both parties, that Dr L. was to not continue in her appointment - Dr L. by agreement was no longer in the matter and another expert appointed - shortly before the commencement of this appeal hearing, the legal team for the appellant notified the respondent’s legal team that they intended to call Dr. L and objection has been taken to her being called to give evidence - Courts of Justice Act of 1936 has a difference in the provisions regarding the allowing of evidence in the High Court to be heard on appeal that was or wasn't heard in the Circuit Court - accepted format of appeal as outlined in case law is that on appeal the same evidence is heard as heard in the original hearing - both experts may reach common ground in their evidence - both experts allowed to give evidence and to speak to each other beforehand.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now