Obeid v Lockley

The applicant, Obeid, sought to vacate the hearing of an appeal against a decision of the primary court. The respondent, Lockley, opposed this application. The matter came before Leeming JA of the Court of Appeal of New South Wales.

The central legal issue was whether the hearing of the appeal should be vacated to allow for the admission of fresh evidence. The applicant contended that this fresh evidence was crucial to the determination of the appeal. However, it was acknowledged that the evidence was not yet available and might not be dispositive of the appeal, with substantial parts of the appeal being independent of this potential evidence.

Leeming JA dismissed the application, reasoning that the admission of fresh evidence on appeal is a discretionary matter governed by principles that require the evidence to be credible, relevant, and likely to have been determinative of the appeal. His Honour found that the applicant had not satisfied these criteria, particularly given the uncertainty surrounding the availability and dispositive nature of the proposed evidence. The court considered that vacating the hearing would cause prejudice to the respondent and that the appeal could proceed on its existing merits.

The notice of motion filed on 18 August 2017 was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondent.