Milner, Bryan John & Ors v Delita Pty Ltd & Ors [1984] FCA 494

Milner, Bryan John & Ors v Delita Pty Ltd & Ors [1984] FCA 494

The proper construction of the orders and the surrounding circumstances do not bar the cross-respondents from objecting to answering the interrogatories. The court, in its discretion, declines to order the cross-respondents to answer at this stage, but leaves open the possibility for applicants to renew their application in light of changed circumstances.

Parties
Applicants: Bryan John Milner and Ors.; Respondent and First Cross Claimant: Delita Pty. Limited; Respondent and First Cross Claimant / Second Cross Respondent: Roger McMillan Glasson; Respondent and First Cross Claimant / Second Cross Respondent: Morris Walter Lewin; First Cross Respondent and Second Cross Claimant: Robert Charles Gooch Morrison; First Cross Respondent and Second Cross Claimant: John Christopher Bennett
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 September 1984
Procedural Posture
Application for Further Answers to Interrogatories / Interlocutory Application / Directions Hearing
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Federal Court Rules, Discretion to Order Answers
Civil Procedure Interrogatories Federal Court Rules Discretion to Order Answers

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bryan John Milner and Ors.

Applicants

Delita Pty. Limited

Respondent and First Cross Claimant

Roger McMillan Glasson

Respondent and First Cross Claimant / Second Cross Respondent

Morris Walter Lewin

Respondent and First Cross Claimant / Second Cross Respondent

Robert Charles Gooch Morrison

First Cross Respondent and Second Cross Claimant

John Christopher Bennett

First Cross Respondent and Second Cross Claimant

Procedural Posture

Application for Further Answers to Interrogatories / Interlocutory Application / Directions Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether cross-respondents are barred from objecting to answering interrogatories administered by applicants on the ground that they do not relate to any fact in issue between applicants and cross-respondents.
  2. 2 Whether the Court, in its discretion, should require cross-respondents to answer the interrogatories in question.

Ratio Decidendi

The proper construction of the orders and the surrounding circumstances do not bar the cross-respondents from objecting to answering the interrogatories. The court, in its discretion, declines to order the cross-respondents to answer at this stage, but leaves open the possibility for applicants to renew their application in light of changed circumstances.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Application for further answers to interrogatories is refused.
  • Liberty to apply if circumstances change.