Teo Tran t/as Canberra Direct and as Canberra Mailing v Calvista Australia Pty Ltd

Teo Tran, trading as Canberra Direct and Canberra Mailing, appealed to the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory against decisions made by a Master. The dispute concerned an application to adduce further evidence on appeal and an application to amend the defence, both of which had been refused by the Master.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether the Master erred in refusing to allow the appellant to amend its defence after the conclusion of the hearing, and whether the Court should admit further expert evidence on appeal concerning a witness's alleged dyslexia. The Court was required to consider whether admitting this new evidence would be in the interests of justice and whether it would have produced a different result at trial.

Regarding the application to amend the defence, the Court found that the amendment sought would have necessitated a rehearing and would have caused substantial injustice to the respondent, which could not be adequately compensated by a costs order. Consequently, the Master’s refusal to grant the amendment was upheld. On the application to adduce further evidence, the Court noted that the expert evidence was not in admissible form as the expert had not been made available for cross-examination. Furthermore, the Court was not satisfied that the witness's alleged dyslexia affected their ability to answer questions at trial, nor that the availability of this evidence at trial would have led to a different outcome.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was ordered to pay the respondent's costs.