C2C Investments Pty Ltd, in the matter of C2C Investments Pty Ltd v Leigh (No 3) [2012] FCA 680

C2C Investments Pty Ltd, in the matter of C2C Investments Pty Ltd v Leigh (No 3) [2012] FCA 680

The challenged paragraphs should not be struck out because, viewed in context, they were either responsive to affidavit material filed by the plaintiffs, relevant or potentially relevant to background events, the first defendant's claimed fees and expenses, the administration, or the reasons for the mortgage over the Kelman Estate, and they did not contain matter shown to be scandalous or oppressive within rr 6.01 or 29.03. Any marginal relevance, discretionary exclusion, or limitation on use could be dealt with at trial, although the first defendant should identify parts of the reports referred to in paragraph 6.1 on which he relies for purposes beyond showing work performed as...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Practice and Procedure Application to Strike Out Paragraphs of an Affidavit / Interlocutory Application Under Rr 6.01 and 29.03 of the Federal Court Rules 2011
Outcome
The plaintiffs' application to strike out the identified paragraphs in the first defendant's affidavit was dismissed, with a direction that the first defendant notify the plaintiffs of parts of reports identified in paragraph 6.1 relied on for purposes other than showing the nature of work carried out in the...
Legal Topics
['strike Out of Affidavit Material' 'scandalous, Irrelevant or Oppressive Material' 'voluntary Administration' 'relevance and Discretionary Exclusion of Evidence']
['practice and Procedure' 'evidence' 'corporations'] ['strike Out of Affidavit Material' 'scandalous, Irrelevant or Oppressive Material' 'voluntary Administration' 'relevance and Discretionary Exclusion of Evidence']

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

Practice and Procedure Application to Strike Out Paragraphs of an Affidavit / Interlocutory Application Under Rr 6.01 and 29.03 of the Federal Court Rules 2011

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether various paragraphs of the first defendant's affidavit sworn on 13 December 2011 contained matter that was scandalous, irrelevant or otherwise oppressive." "Whether challenged affidavit material responding to the plaintiffs' earlier affidavit should be struck out before trial." 'Whether reports and other documents referred to in the affidavit should be identified more specifically for the plaintiffs where relied on for purposes beyond showing work performed by the administrator.']

Ratio Decidendi

The challenged paragraphs should not be struck out because, viewed in context, they were either responsive to affidavit material filed by the plaintiffs, relevant or potentially relevant to background events, the first defendant's claimed fees and expenses, the administration, or the reasons for the mortgage over the Kelman Estate, and they did not contain matter shown to be scandalous or oppressive within rr 6.01 or 29.03. Any marginal relevance, discretionary exclusion, or limitation on use could be dealt with at trial, although the first defendant should identify parts of the reports referred to in paragraph 6.1 on which he relies for purposes beyond showing work performed as...

Court Disposition

The plaintiffs' application to strike out the identified paragraphs in the first defendant's affidavit was dismissed, with a direction that the first defendant notify the plaintiffs of parts of reports identified in paragraph 6.1 relied on for purposes other than showing the nature of work carried out in the...

Orders

  • ['The parties are to provide within seven days an agreed form of orders giving effect to these reasons.']