Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi Energia S.R.L. (No 9) [2015] FCA 623

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Prysmian Cavi E Sistemi Energia S.R.L. (No 9) [2015] FCA 623

The amendments sought do not constitute a late change in the applicant's case; respondents have had notice that the allegation was of employment or agency in a broader sense. The interrogatories are targeted, relate to an important issue, and are not burdensome or oppressive. Although the application is late and the delay remains unexplained, there is no evidence of deliberate delay, and no sufficient prejudice to the respondents exists. Therefore, leave is granted for interrogatories and certain amendments.

Parties
Applicant: AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION; First Respondent: PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI ENERGIA S.R.L. (FORMERLY PIRELLI CAVI E SISTEMI ENERGIA S.P.A.); Second Respondent: NEXANS SA RCS PARIS 393 525 852
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application / Pre Trial
Outcome
Interlocutory application granted in part; leave granted for certain amendments and interrogatories.
Legal Topics
Interrogatories, Leave to Amend Pleadings
Practice and Procedure Interrogatories Leave to Amend Pleadings

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AUSTRALIAN COMPETITION AND CONSUMER COMMISSION

Applicant

PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI ENERGIA S.R.L. (FORMERLY PIRELLI CAVI E SISTEMI ENERGIA S.P.A.)

First Respondent

NEXANS SA RCS PARIS 393 525 852

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Application / Pre Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted to administer interrogatories to the respondents
  2. 2 Whether leave should be granted to amend the Amended Statement of Claim

Ratio Decidendi

The amendments sought do not constitute a late change in the applicant's case; respondents have had notice that the allegation was of employment or agency in a broader sense. The interrogatories are targeted, relate to an important issue, and are not burdensome or oppressive. Although the application is late and the delay remains unexplained, there is no evidence of deliberate delay, and no sufficient prejudice to the respondents exists. Therefore, leave is granted for interrogatories and certain amendments.

Court Disposition

Interlocutory application granted in part; leave granted for certain amendments and interrogatories.

Orders

  • The first respondent provide written answers to the interrogatories within seven days.
  • The second respondent provide written answers to the interrogatories within seven days.