Hogan, P. & Anor v Koala Dundee Pty Ltd & Anor [1988] FCA 481

Hogan, P. & Anor v Koala Dundee Pty Ltd & Anor [1988] FCA 481

The Court determined that for certain interrogatories (5, 6, 20, 21, 29(e), 29(f), 32, 33, 34, 35, 41(e), 50, 51, 52, and 53), the grounds of objection were not made out and they were sufficiently relevant or helpful to require further and better answers under applicable rules; other interrogatories were deemed too peripheral, introspective, or burdensome to warrant further answering.

Parties
First Applicant: Paul Hogan; Second Applicant: Rimfire Films Limited; First Respondent: Koala Dundee Pty Limited; Second Respondent: Anthony Robert Reeves; Second Respondent: Joseph Anthony John Piovesan
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 August 1988
Procedural Posture
General Division Proceeding / Interlocutory Application for Further and Better Answers to Interrogatories
Outcome
Further and better answers to specified interrogatories ordered.
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Objections to Interrogatories, Federal Court Procedure
Civil Procedure Interrogatories Objections to Interrogatories Federal Court Procedure

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Paul Hogan

First Applicant

Rimfire Films Limited

Second Applicant

Koala Dundee Pty Limited

First Respondent

Anthony Robert Reeves

Second Respondent

Joseph Anthony John Piovesan

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

General Division Proceeding / Interlocutory Application for Further and Better Answers to Interrogatories

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether further and better answers to certain interrogatories should be ordered
  2. 2 Application of Federal Court Rules order 16 rule 6 and rule 8 to objections and answers

Ratio Decidendi

The Court determined that for certain interrogatories (5, 6, 20, 21, 29(e), 29(f), 32, 33, 34, 35, 41(e), 50, 51, 52, and 53), the grounds of objection were not made out and they were sufficiently relevant or helpful to require further and better answers under applicable rules; other interrogatories were deemed too peripheral, introspective, or burdensome to warrant further answering.

Court Disposition

Further and better answers to specified interrogatories ordered.

Orders

  • Further and better answers to interrogatories numbers 5, 6, 20, 21, 29(e), 29(f), 32, 33, 34, 35, 41(e), 50 as to the first respondent, 51, 52 as to the first respondent, and 53, to be delivered on or before 9.30 a.m. on Monday, 15 August 1988.
  • Costs of today reserved.