Lakatoi Universal Pty Ltd v Langley Alexander Walker

The case of Lakatoi Universal Pty Ltd v Langley Alexander Walker was heard by the Supreme Court of Queensland. The dispute between the parties involved a request by the plaintiff to allow cross-examination of a witness by two of their counsel, rather than the usual one. The defendant objected to this application, arguing that it would disrupt the usual conduct of the trial and potentially prejudice their case.

The central legal issue the court had to address was whether the plaintiff should be permitted to cross-examine the witness using two counsel. The court considered the principles that govern the exercise of discretion in such matters, including the importance of continuity in the counsel present during cross-examination and the nature of the witness in question. The court concluded that in this instance, the application should be allowed, recognising the potential benefits of having two experienced counsel to effectively challenge the witness.

The court found that the importance of maintaining continuity during cross-examination is significant, but not absolute. In this case, the nature of the witness and the complexity of the issues at stake justified the allowance of two counsel to cross-examine. The court balanced these considerations against the potential disruption to the proceedings and concluded that the benefits of permitting the application outweighed the drawbacks. As a result, the court granted the plaintiff's application to cross-examine the witness with two counsel present.