Angliss v Urquhart

The appeal in *Angliss v Urquhart* concerned an order made by Barrett J under Part 25 Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules, which sought to compel a medical examination of a party. The dispute arose in circumstances where the evidence obtained from this examination was intended to challenge the testamentary and legal capacity of the person to be examined. The parties involved were Angliss (the applicant for the order) and Urquhart (the respondent, who was the subject of the proposed examination).

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the Supreme Court had the power to order a medical examination under Part 25 Rule 5 for the purpose of challenging a party's testamentary and legal capacity. This involved considering the scope and application of the rule, particularly in the context of proceedings where such capacity was in dispute, and whether the exercise of discretion by the primary judge in ordering the examination was appropriate.

The Court of Appeal, comprising Sheller, Beazley and Stein JJA, determined that the order for a medical examination was not authorised by Part 25 Rule 5 in these circumstances. The Court reasoned that the rule was not intended to facilitate the obtaining of evidence to challenge a party's fundamental legal and testamentary capacity. Consequently, the discretion exercised by Barrett J in making the order was set aside.

Leave to appeal was granted, and the appeal was upheld. The order made by Barrett J on 16 October 2001 was vacated, and the opponents were ordered to pay the costs of both the application for leave to appeal and the appeal itself.