Guillermo and Boehm

In the matter of *Guillermo and Boehm*, heard before Cronin J, the dispute concerned applications for rulings on specific paragraphs within the parties' respective affidavits. The precise nature of the underlying dispute is not detailed in the provided text, but the focus of the court's attention was on the admissibility or relevance of certain evidentiary statements.

The primary legal issue before Cronin J was to determine the status of particular paragraphs within the affidavits filed by the parties. This involved an assessment of whether these paragraphs were admissible as evidence, relevant to the proceedings, or otherwise objectionable on legal grounds. The court was tasked with making specific rulings on these contested portions of the evidence.

Cronin J delivered extempore reasons for judgment, indicating a decision was made on the spot regarding the contested affidavit paragraphs. The court applied principles of evidence and procedure to evaluate each disputed paragraph. The outcome of this evaluation led to specific rulings being made, as detailed in the reasons provided.

The court ordered that rulings be made in respect of the particular paragraphs of the parties’ respective affidavits as set out in the reasons delivered extempore this day.