Webb, J. v Yarralumla Investments Pty Ltd [1986] FCA 424

Webb, J. v Yarralumla Investments Pty Ltd [1986] FCA 424

Only interrogatories 1, 2(a), 3, 4(a), 23 and 24 were sufficiently justified in N.S.W. G150 of 1984, and only interrogatories 1, 2(a), 3, 4(a), 23, 24, 69(c), 69(e) and 69(f) were sufficiently justified in QLD. G36 of 1983. The other interrogatories were not ordered to be answered because they concerned peripheral background matters, matters not pleaded or shown to be significant, or detailed alleged conversations where the respondents had pleaded responsively and no special circumstances justified further answers.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 April 1986
Procedural Posture
Application for Further and Better Answers to Interrogatories / Interlocutory Application
Outcome
Application allowed in part; specified interrogatories ordered to be answered and the remaining interrogatories not to be answered; costs reserved to the trial judge with an intimation as to costs.
Legal Topics
['interrogatories' 'further and Better Answers' 'misleading Statements' 'failure to Disclose Information' 'section 52 of the Trade Practices Act' 'costs Reserved']
['civil Procedure' 'trade Practices'] ['interrogatories' 'further and Better Answers' 'misleading Statements' 'failure to Disclose Information' 'section 52 of the Trade Practices Act' 'costs Reserved']

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 Further and Better Answers to Interrogatories / Interlocutory Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the respondents should be required to answer further interrogatories concerning alleged conversations, background matters, documents, solicitors' activities and alleged failures to disclose information." "Whether interrogatories concerning alleged conversations were necessary despite the respondents' pleading denials." 'What costs order should be made on the interrogatories application.']

Ratio Decidendi

Only interrogatories 1, 2(a), 3, 4(a), 23 and 24 were sufficiently justified in N.S.W. G150 of 1984, and only interrogatories 1, 2(a), 3, 4(a), 23, 24, 69(c), 69(e) and 69(f) were sufficiently justified in QLD. G36 of 1983. The other interrogatories were not ordered to be answered because they concerned peripheral background matters, matters not pleaded or shown to be significant, or detailed alleged conversations where the respondents had pleaded responsively and no special circumstances justified further answers.

Court Disposition

Application allowed in part; specified interrogatories ordered to be answered and the remaining interrogatories not to be answered; costs reserved to the trial judge with an intimation as to costs.

Orders

  • ['In N.S.W. G150 of 1984, interrogatories numbered 1, 2(a), 3, 4(a), 23 and 24 contained in the notice to answer interrogatories filed on 6 March 1986 be answered.' 'In N.S.W. G150 of 1984, the remaining interrogatories contained in the notice not be answered.' "In N.S.W. G150 of 1984, costs be reserved to the trial...