Jupp v Bartkowski
[2008] QSC 12
To print this judgment please return to the case and click on the PDF icon
next to the
case name. For court use, a full PDF copy is required or preferred.
Exit Distraction Free Reading Mode
Please Note: You are about to print a copy of the onscreen
version of
this judgment. For court use, a full PDF copy of the judgment is required or preferred. Please
return to
the case for PDF printing options.
- Unreported Judgment
- Jupp v Bartkowski[2008] QSC 12
- Add to List
Jupp v Bartkowski[2008] QSC 12
Jupp v Bartkowski[2008] QSC 12
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CIVIL JURISDICTION
ATKINSON J
No 8312 of 2006
PETA CASSANDRA JUPP | Plaintiff |
and | |
NEIL BARTKOWSKI | Defendant |
BRISBANE
DATE 05/02/2008
ORDER
HER HONOUR: The plaintiff has applied for orders pursuant to rule 429G of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules for a named psychiatrist to be appointed as an expert to be the sole expert to assist the Court in determining a substantial issue in the proceeding.
Upon the return of this application the defendant has agreed to that appointment. The expert in question was originally engaged by the defendant, so it is hardly surprising that the defendant has agreed to her being appointed the sole expert. The proposed expert is well known to the Court, has the relevant expertise and is clearly appropriate to be appointed a sole expert.
A large number of consequential orders are sought, all of which are appropriate. The only matter in contention before me today is whether or not the cost of the expert attending to give evidence at the trial be borne in the first instance equally between the plaintiff and the defendant but those costs be dealt with by a later order of the Court upon disposition of the matter.
As I said during submissions of the defendant's counsel, anything to the contrary is almost unarguable. Where the expert is going to give evidence to the Court to assist the Court with the right to be cross-examined by either party, it is entirely appropriate that the parties share the cost of her appearing to give evidence at the trial in the first instance and I make the order as per draft which I will initial and place with the file.
HER HONOUR: The costs of and incidental to this application be paid by the defendant fixed at $3,770.93.
HER HONOUR: All right, so paragraph 7 will be amended to insert the words, "Fixed at $3,770.93" after the word, "application" and deleting the words, "On the standard basis to be agreed or assessed."