Courts just make it up as they go along!!!!

[ETFarce]

The rule as I found out was; evidence which is easily accessible but not disclosed at a hearing, cant later be relied on for reconsiderations or appeals because it will not be seen as NEW evidence.


Now we come to Ryan v Resende [2018]; in this case evidence which was easily accessible but not disclosed at tribunal was later allowed by an appeal court. Yet, the judge at my et refused to accept evidence for a reconsideration simply because it was easily accessible and i didnt disclose it at et...and in my case the evidence would have changed the outcome!!

The system is a joke!!!

[wales01man]

Why was the evidence if available presented in the first place.

[mariefab]

You are not comparing like with like here.

In the Ryan v Resende case the trial won't take place until next year.
Further, liability has already been judged against the Respondent so the trial next year will only be about the remedy (i.e. compensation to be awarded to the applicant) and causation issues.

At an earlier case management and costs hearing the applicant had asked to present at trial evidence from an expert who would be able to assess the need for ongoing care and the costs of that care.
One of the grounds that it was refused on was that the other experts would be able to comment on and/or deal with the issues.
If there is no expert evidence available before the court at the trial next year the judge would have to spend a great deal of time working out what the ongoing care needs will be and how much that will cost and he would only have estimates based on the applicant's past and existing needs and costs to rely on.
The only new evidence that the applicant asked to introduce is evidence from the other experts that they can't deal with the issues.

Your reconsideration case was about introducing new evidence after both the trial (ET) and the Judgement had already taken place.