Grosglik v Grant (No 2)

In *Grosglik v Grant (No 2)*, the High Court of Australia considered an application by the respondent to admit fresh evidence on appeal. The appeal originated from a decision of a police magistrate in Victoria, sitting as a court of petty sessions, which the parties contended was exercising Federal jurisdiction. The respondent had discovered a written agreement during the hearing of the appeal that could not previously be located.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether it had the power to admit fresh evidence on an appeal from a State court exercising Federal jurisdiction. The respondent argued that High Court Rules, Part II, Section IV, rule 1, which stipulated that such appeals should be brought in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as appeals to the State Supreme Court, incorporated Victorian State law permitting the admission of fresh evidence on appeal.

The High Court unanimously refused the application, holding that it had no power to admit fresh evidence. The Court reasoned that High Court Rules, Part II, Section IV, rule 1, and Section 39 of the Judiciary Act 1903-1940, primarily govern the procedure for *bringing* an appeal to the High Court, not the practice to be followed during the *hearing* of an appeal. Citing previous authorities, the Court affirmed that fresh evidence is generally not admissible on appeals to the High Court. Therefore, the Victorian legislation allowing for the admission of fresh evidence on appeal to the Supreme Court was not incorporated into the High Court's appellate jurisdiction by the relevant rules.