Tolman Holdings Pty Ltd v Lyra

Link copied
Case Copied 28 min read

TOLMAN HOLDINGS PTY LTD -v- LYRA & ORS [2005] WASC 260



SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIACitation No:[2005] WASC 260
Case No:CIV:1426/200525 OCTOBER 2005
Coram:JENKINS J25/11/05
17Judgment Part:1 of 1
Result: Evidence of what was said at the pre-trial conference on 19 October 2004 in
Local Court action No 20633 of 2003 is inadmissible in this matter
B
PDF Version
Parties:TOLMAN HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 009 125 731)
GAVIN LYRA
MICHELLE LYRA
BUILDERS' REGISTRATION BOARD
BUILDING DISPUTES TRIBUNAL

Catchwords:

Evidence
Preliminary issue
Admissibility of anything said at a pre-trial conference in the Local Court
Whether the section prohibiting the admission of what occurred at a pre-trial conference saved by the repeal of the Local Courts Act
Abuse of process

Legislation:

Courts Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2004 (WA), s 4, s 7
Interpretation Act 1984 (WA), s 37, s 37(c), s 37(d), s 37(1)(c), s 37(1)(d)
Local Courts Act 1904 (WA), s 45B, s 45B(8), s 45B(9)
Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (WA)
Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Rules 2005 (WA), Pt IX, r 43(2)
Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA)
Motor Car Act 1958 (Vic), s 80F
Supreme Court Act 1935 (WA), s 71(1), s 71(3)

Case References:

R v Carroll [2002] 213 CLR 635
Sutton v Bradshaw [1988] VR 920
Yrttiaho v Public Curator (Qld) (1971) 125 CLR 228

Beswick v Beswick [1968] AC 58
Clarkson Booker Ltd v Andjel [1964] 2 QB 775
Cooper Brookes (Wollongong) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) (1981) 147 CLR 297
Goldsmith v Sperrings Ltd [1977] 2 All ER 566
Harrison v Hocking [2000] WASC 188
Hay v Butler & Crooks (1991) 7 WAR 333
Jones v Bartlett (2000) 205 CLR 166
Morris v Wentworth-Stanley [1999] QB 1004
Neil & Ors v Nugent & Ors [2005] WASC 166
Reid v Howard (1995) 184 CLR 1
Spautz v Gibbs (1990) 21 NSWLR 230
Trident General Insurance Co Ltd v McNiece Bros Pty Ltd (1988) 165 CLR 107
Wan v Sweetman (1998) 19 WAR 94
White Industries (Qld) Pty Ltd v Flower & Hart (1998) 156 ALR 169
Whitfords Beach Pty Ltd v Gadsdon (1992) 6 WAR 537
Williams v Spautz (1992) 174 CLR 509

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
    IN CHAMBERS
CITATION : TOLMAN HOLDINGS PTY LTD -v- LYRA & ORS [2005] WASC 260 CORAM : JENKINS J HEARD : 25 OCTOBER 2005 DELIVERED : 25 NOVEMBER 2005 FILE NO/S : CIV 1426 of 2005 BETWEEN : TOLMAN HOLDINGS PTY LTD (ACN 009 125 731)
    Plaintiff

    AND

    GAVIN LYRA
    MICHELLE LYRA
    First Defendants

    BUILDERS' REGISTRATION BOARD
    BUILDING DISPUTES TRIBUNAL
    Second Defendants



Catchwords:

Evidence - Preliminary issue - Admissibility of anything said at a pre-trial conference in the Local Court - Whether the section prohibiting the admission of what occurred at a pre-trial conference saved by the repeal of the Local Courts Act - Abuse of process



(Page 2)



Legislation:

Courts Legislation Amendment and Repeal Act 2004

CaseChat AU logo

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Tolman Holdings Pty Ltd v Lyra and more:

  • Read every judgment in full
  • Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
  • See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
  • Download judgments as PDF or Word
Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details
Case
[2005] WASC 260
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Tolman Holdings Pty Ltd v Lyra & Ors was heard by Jenkins J in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The primary issue before the court was whether evidence of what transpired at a pre-trial conference in the Local Court could be admitted in a subsequent matter. The plaintiff, Tolman Holdings, sought to adduce evidence from the pre-trial conference to support its application for injunctions and declarations against the first and second defendants. The first defendants objected to the admissibility of this evidence, citing the prohibition on the admission of pre-trial conference proceedings in s 45B(8) of the repealed Local Courts Act 1904 (WA). Jenkins J found that despite the repeal of the Local Courts Act, the prohibition in s 45B(8) remained effective, preserving a right or privilege accrued prior to the repeal. The court also held that the prohibition was intended to apply to prevent parties from relying on what was said or done at a pre-trial conference to evidence a settlement in court, and that there was no inherent jurisdiction to admit such evidence to prevent an abuse of process. Consequently, the evidence of what was said at the pre-trial conference was deemed inadmissible.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.