Lewis v Nortex Pty Ltd (In liq)

The case of Lewis v Nortex Pty Ltd (In liq) involved the admissibility of certain evidence in a dispute over the ownership of intellectual property rights. The plaintiff, Lewis, claimed ownership of certain intellectual property, while Nortex Pty Ltd, in liquidation, contested the claim. The Federal Court of Australia was tasked with determining the admissibility of a statement made by an employee of Nortex that was not presented as a witness.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether a statement made by a person who was not called as a witness could be admitted under the exceptions to the hearsay rule. Specifically, the court needed to decide whether Nortex could be compelled to call the person who made the statement as a witness under section 169 of the Evidence Act 1995. The court also had to consider the relevance of the statement to the issues in the case.

The court found that the statement was hearsay and inadmissible unless it fell within an exception to the hearsay rule. The court considered section 169 of the Evidence Act 1995, which allows a court to require a party to call a person as a witness if the party intends to tender evidence of a statement made by the person. However, the court held that Nortex could not be compelled to call the person as a witness because the statement was not relevant to the issues in the case. The court also found that the statement did not fall within any of the exceptions to the hearsay rule.

The court held that the statement was inadmissible hearsay and could not be used as evidence in the case. The court did not make any specific orders as the case was ultimately settled out of court. However, the decision provides guidance on the admissibility of hearsay evidence and the operation of section 169 of the Evidence Act 1995.