AMI Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1484

AMI Australia Holdings Pty Ltd v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2009] NSWSC 1484

Further and better particulars of defence are not warranted, as defences sufficiently particularised; strike out application dismissed. Newspaper rule does not apply to actions for breach of confidence or injurious falsehood; discovery must be unmasked as source admitted. Leave to amend defence (of iniquity) granted. Subpoenas set aside where irrelevant, others upheld. No stay as no irredeemable prejudice.

Parties
First Plaintiff: AMI Australia Holdings Pty Ltd; Second Plaintiff: Advanced Medical Institute Pty Ltd; First Defendant: Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd; Second Defendant: Rita Almohty; Third Defendant: Kelly Burke; Fourth Defendant: Kate McClymont
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Applications in Equity Proceedings / Ruling on Applications for Particulars, Strike Out, Discovery, Subpoenas, Amendment, and Stay
Outcome
Further and better particulars refused. Strike out application dismissed. Further and better (unmasked) discovery granted. Subpoenas set aside in part and upheld in part. Stay refused. Leave to amend defence granted. Costs apportioned.
Legal Topics
Particulars of Defence, Strike Out Application, Discovery, Subpoenas, Confidentiality, Public Interest Disclosure, Breach of Confidence, Injurious Falsehood
Equity Procedure Particulars of Defence Strike Out Application Discovery Subpoenas Confidentiality Public Interest Disclosure +2 more

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AMI Australia Holdings Pty Ltd

First Plaintiff

Advanced Medical Institute Pty Ltd

Second Plaintiff

Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd

First Defendant

Rita Almohty

Second Defendant

Kelly Burke

Third Defendant

Kate McClymont

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Applications in Equity Proceedings / Ruling on Applications for Particulars, Strike Out, Discovery, Subpoenas, Amendment, and Stay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether defendants must provide further and better particulars of their defences
  2. 2 Whether defences should be struck out as evasive or defective
  3. 3 Whether further and better discovery should be granted (including unmasking of confidential source)

Ratio Decidendi

Further and better particulars of defence are not warranted, as defences sufficiently particularised; strike out application dismissed. Newspaper rule does not apply to actions for breach of confidence or injurious falsehood; discovery must be unmasked as source admitted. Leave to amend defence (of iniquity) granted. Subpoenas set aside where irrelevant, others upheld. No stay as no irredeemable prejudice.

Court Disposition

Further and better particulars refused. Strike out application dismissed. Further and better (unmasked) discovery granted. Subpoenas set aside in part and upheld in part. Stay refused. Leave to amend defence granted. Costs apportioned.

Orders

  • Second defendant granted leave to file further amended defence.
  • Plaintiffs not entitled to further and better particulars; strike out applications dismissed.