Hearn v O’Rourke [2006] FCA 1320

Hearn v O’Rourke [2006] FCA 1320

Further answers are required from both applicants to interrogatory no 9, as their current responses are not in terms responsive to the question of their knowledge prior to viewing the documentary. The answers to interrogatories 38-41 by the first applicant are sufficient and require no further response. The applicants are to pay 40 per cent of the costs of and incidental to the Notice of Motion, as the respondents were partially successful and the applicants’ failure to provide further answers made the application necessary.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Orders Regarding Interrogatories and Costs / Interlocutory Judgment on Notice of Motion
Outcome
Application granted in part
Legal Topics
['discovery' 'interrogatories' 'costs']
['practice and Procedure'] ['discovery' 'interrogatories' 'costs']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Orders Regarding Interrogatories and Costs / Interlocutory Judgment on Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicants should provide further answers to interrogatory no 9' 'Whether the answers to interrogatories 38-41 by the first applicant were adequate' 'Entitlement to costs in relation to the notice of motion']

Ratio Decidendi

Further answers are required from both applicants to interrogatory no 9, as their current responses are not in terms responsive to the question of their knowledge prior to viewing the documentary. The answers to interrogatories 38-41 by the first applicant are sufficient and require no further response. The applicants are to pay 40 per cent of the costs of and incidental to the Notice of Motion, as the respondents were partially successful and the applicants’ failure to provide further answers made the application necessary.

Court Disposition

Application granted in part

Orders

  • ["The Applicants file and serve a further answer to Interrogatory No 9 contained in the 'Notice to Answer Interrogatories' of the Respondents dated 14 October 2005, within 14 days." 'The Applicants in the proceeding pay 40 per cent of the costs of and incidental to the Notice of Motion filed on 9 August 2006 by the...