Appeal Rejected: Court Denies Introduction of Additional Evidence
📌 In brief
The Court of Appeal rejected the appellant's request to introduce new evidence in his appeal, stating that the evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence at the time of the trial. The only exception was a webinar held after the trial.
⚖️ Legal holding
An appellant must demonstrate 'special grounds' to introduce new evidence in an appeal if the evidence was available with reasonable diligence at the time of the trial.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
📄 Read the full judgment⚖️ View on the official court website ↗
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The appellant could not demonstrate that the additional evidence was not available with reasonable diligence at the time of trial.
- The court stood over the application to adduce evidence from a webinar dated 6 September 2020, as it was not heard during the initial hearing.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The appellant failed to show special grounds for introducing new evidence that was available before or could have been obtained with reasonable diligence at the time of trial.
- Extremely serious allegations of dishonesty and misconduct against a party were dismissed due to insufficient basis provided.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the appellant could introduce new evidence in his appeal, which included documents and a webinar.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the application because the evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence at the time of the trial, except for the webinar.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, it means that they must demonstrate 'special grounds' to introduce new evidence in an appeal if the evidence was available with reasonable diligence at the time of the trial.