Barrett Property Group Pty Limited v Metricon Homes Pty Limited [2009] FCA 51

Barrett Property Group Pty Limited v Metricon Homes Pty Limited [2009] FCA 51

Leave to administer the interrogatories was refused because, in light of the Amended Reply, Mr Roberts' affidavit, and the way the applicants stated their case, the proposed interrogatories were not relevant to any material fact in dispute. The essential facts about the applicants' awareness were not materially disputed, nothing turned on further details about dates or manner of knowledge, and several interrogatories were also objectionable as too broad, oppressive, or matters for cross-examination.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure Application for Leave to Administer Interrogatories in a Copyright Infringement Proceeding / Interlocutory Motion
Outcome
Leave refused; motion dismissed; costs of the motion to be costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['interrogatories' 'relevance to Material Facts in Dispute' 'oppression' 'further and Better Particulars' 'estoppel Defence']
['practice and Procedure' 'copyright'] ['interrogatories' 'relevance to Material Facts in Dispute' 'oppression' 'further and Better Particulars' 'estoppel Defence']

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

Practice and Procedure Application for Leave to Administer Interrogatories in a Copyright Infringement Proceeding / Interlocutory Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave should be granted to file and serve a notice to answer interrogatories.' 'Whether the proposed interrogatories were relevant to any material fact in dispute.' 'Whether the proposed interrogatories were too broad, oppressive, or proper only for cross-examination.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to administer the interrogatories was refused because, in light of the Amended Reply, Mr Roberts' affidavit, and the way the applicants stated their case, the proposed interrogatories were not relevant to any material fact in dispute. The essential facts about the applicants' awareness were not materially disputed, nothing turned on further details about dates or manner of knowledge, and several interrogatories were also objectionable as too broad, oppressive, or matters for cross-examination.

Court Disposition

Leave refused; motion dismissed; costs of the motion to be costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['Leave to file and serve a notice to answer interrogatories be refused.' 'The motion, notice of which is dated 11 July 2008, be dismissed.' 'The respondents file and serve any further affidavits on which they propose to rely by 4.15 pm on 13 February 2009.' 'The parties file and serve any objections to the...