Hadid, Albert v Lenfest Communications Inc & Ors [1995] FCA 1159

Hadid, Albert v Lenfest Communications Inc & Ors [1995] FCA 1159

Given the gravity of the amended causes of action and necessity for fairness, respondents' evidence (except expert and uncontroversial evidence) should be given orally, with certain witnesses permitted to give oral evidence. However, pre-filed affidavits may be used for specific matters, and procedural arrangements are made to avoid surprise and ensure each party has adequate notice.

Parties
Applicant: Albert Hadid; First Respondent / Cross Claimant: Lenfest Communications Inc; Second Respondent: H.F. Lenfest also known as Gerry Lenfest; Third Respondent: Bain Capital Markets Limited; Fourth Respondent: Wayne Burt; Fifth Respondent: Australis Media Limited; Sixth Respondent: Rodney Price; Cross Respondent: Albert Hadid
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 August 1995
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application; Pre Trial Orders Regarding Evidence
Outcome
Orders regarding procedure for evidence; matter stood over; costs in the cause.
Legal Topics
Misleading and Deceptive Conduct, Affidavit and Oral Evidence, Discovery, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Conspiracy to Defraud, Damages
Trade Practices Corporations Law Equity Misleading and Deceptive Conduct Affidavit and Oral Evidence Discovery Breach of Fiduciary Duty Conspiracy to Defraud +1 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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Albert Hadid

Applicant

Lenfest Communications Inc

First Respondent / Cross Claimant

H.F. Lenfest also known as Gerry Lenfest

Second Respondent

Bain Capital Markets Limited

Third Respondent

Wayne Burt

Fourth Respondent

Australis Media Limited

Fifth Respondent

Rodney Price

Sixth Respondent

Albert Hadid

Cross Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application; Pre Trial Orders Regarding Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence should be given orally or by affidavit in view of amended statement of claim and nature of allegations
  2. 2 Whether fairness requires oral testimony for certain witnesses
  3. 3 Whether changes to pleading justify alteration of previous evidence orders

Ratio Decidendi

Given the gravity of the amended causes of action and necessity for fairness, respondents' evidence (except expert and uncontroversial evidence) should be given orally, with certain witnesses permitted to give oral evidence. However, pre-filed affidavits may be used for specific matters, and procedural arrangements are made to avoid surprise and ensure each party has adequate notice.

Court Disposition

Orders regarding procedure for evidence; matter stood over; costs in the cause.

Orders

  • The respondent's evidence should be given orally, except expert and uncontroversial evidence which may be by affidavit.
  • The evidence of Messrs Burt, Price, Lenfest, Heller, and Plant may be taken orally.