Skip to Content

Decisions of the Superior Courts of New South Wales, 1788-1899

Atkinson v. Barton and Another [1842] NSWSupC 5

affidavits - perjury

Dowling C.J., in equity, January 1842

Source: Sydney Herald, 8 January 1842 [1]   


In this case Mr. Donnelly moved that Mr. Fitzhardinge, the attorney for one of the defendants, should be ruled to pay to Mr. O'Reilly, the attorney of the infants in the cause, the sum of £20, being the costs of the exceptions which had been taken to the defendants' answer, a portion of which had been removed from the record for impertinence. The learned gentleman moved on the affidavit of William Roberts and John Ord, both described as clerks to Mr. O'Reilly, the plaintiff's attorney in the cause.

Mr. Windeyer took the objection, that neither the residence of the deponents nor of the solicitor appeared on the face of the affidavits, which was required by the practice of the Court.

Mr. Donnelly having replied, the Chief Justice afterwards observed that the addition referred to by Mr. Windeyer, would be a necessary part of the affidavits, in the event of perjury at any time being assigned upon them, therefore Mr. Donnelly withdrew his motion.


[1] See also Atkinson v Barton, 1841

Published by the Division of Law, Macquarie University