Rotadyne Plastics Pty Limited v Suto

Rotadyne Plastics Pty Limited (the applicant) sought special leave to appeal to the High Court of Australia from a decision of the Court of Appeal. The dispute concerned the interpretation of provisions within section 75A of the Supreme Court Act relating to the reception of further evidence on appeal.

The primary legal issue before the High Court was whether section 75A of the Supreme Court Act, particularly subsections (7) to (10), required the demonstration of special grounds to justify the reception of evidence concerning facts arising after the original hearing. The applicant also contended that the Court of Appeal had erred in its interpretation of these statutory provisions.

The applicant argued that a proper interpretation of section 75A did not necessitate the demonstration of special grounds for admitting post-hearing evidence. Support for this interpretation was drawn from the dissenting judgment in *Radnedge's* case, which emphasised the importance of giving effect to the statutory language irrespective of pre-existing common law principles, established practice, or perceived inconvenience. The dissenting judge stressed that judicial adherence to parliamentary will, as expressed in statutory language, was paramount.