Southern Cross Airlines Holdings Ltd v Westpac Banking Corp & Ors [1997] FCA 886

Southern Cross Airlines Holdings Ltd v Westpac Banking Corp & Ors [1997] FCA 886

Further answers were required only where the interrogatory was sufficiently tied to pleaded issues and was not oppressive or otherwise answered: interrogatory 5(c) was relevant because the account operating authority was relied on not only contractually but also by incorporation in pleas of estoppel and authority by holding out; interrogatory 56(f) was relevant to alleged negligence by Tingiri and did not require Westpac to identify every constituent account in the Decer Ceder Group; interrogatory 70(a) and (b), confined to Alexander, was relevant to the duty of care alleged against him; and interrogatory 71, confined to TAE calculations by Alexander or an officer other than Tingiri who...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 1997
Procedural Posture
Motion for Further and Better Answers to Interrogatories / Interlocutory Notice of Motion
Outcome
Motion allowed in part; further and better answers ordered for interrogatories 5(c), 56(f), 70(a) and (b) as confined, and 71 as confined; other requested further answers refused; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
['interrogatories' 'discovery and Pre Trial Procedure' 'objections to Interrogatories' 'relevance and Materiality' 'oppressive Interrogatories' 'bank Account Operating Authority' 'ostensible Authority and Estoppel' 'negligence by Bank Officers']
['civil Procedure' 'banking and Finance' 'corporations' 'trade Practices'] ['interrogatories' 'discovery and Pre Trial Procedure' 'objections to Interrogatories' 'relevance and Materiality' 'oppressive Interrogatories' 'bank Account Operating Authority' 'ostensible Authority and Estoppel' 'negligence by Bank Officers']

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

Motion for Further and Better Answers to Interrogatories / Interlocutory Notice of Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether Westpac should be required to provide further and better answers to interrogatory 5(c) about who relied on the account operating authority dated 25 February 1992 and in what respect.' 'Whether Westpac should be required to answer interrogatories about its policies or practices concerning authorised signatories, overdraft approval, reporting accounts out of order, and reporting foreign currency transactions out of order.' 'Whether Westpac should be required to identify bank officers who signed internal bank documents, deposit slips, a bank cheque request, or a bank cheque where Westpac had otherwise admitted approval by a bank officer believed to be Tingiri.' 'Whether interrogatories about the Total Assessed Exposure of the Decer Ceder Group were relevant, sufficiently material, oppressive, fishing, or embarrassing.' 'Whether interrogatories about supervision, monitoring, or TAE calculations by Alexander or officers reporting to him were relevant to pleaded allegations of negligence against Alexander.']

Ratio Decidendi

Further answers were required only where the interrogatory was sufficiently tied to pleaded issues and was not oppressive or otherwise answered: interrogatory 5(c) was relevant because the account operating authority was relied on not only contractually but also by incorporation in pleas of estoppel and authority by holding out; interrogatory 56(f) was relevant to alleged negligence by Tingiri and did not require Westpac to identify every constituent account in the Decer Ceder Group; interrogatory 70(a) and (b), confined to Alexander, was relevant to the duty of care alleged against him; and interrogatory 71, confined to TAE calculations by Alexander or an officer other than Tingiri who...

Court Disposition

Motion allowed in part; further and better answers ordered for interrogatories 5(c), 56(f), 70(a) and (b) as confined, and 71 as confined; other requested further answers refused; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • ['Within 21 days of this Order the respondent file and serve an affidavit making further and better answers to the following interrogatories administered for its examination on behalf of the applicant: 5(c); 56(f); 70(a) and (b) confined to supervision or monitoring by Alexander; 71 confined to the calculation of a...