Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 35) [2022] FCA 560

Roberts-Smith v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited (No 35) [2022] FCA 560

Leave was granted because Person 81's evidence may be relevant to an important issue, the catalyst for the application arose only during the respondents' evidence, there was no delay by the applicant, and the potential prejudice to the respondents could be managed by accommodating reasonable requests and applying principles concerning evidence not put to other witnesses.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Application for Leave to Issue a Subpoena to Give Evidence / Application During Trial After Evidence Called by the Respondents
Outcome
Application granted.
Legal Topics
['leave to Issue Subpoena to Give Evidence' 'outlines of Evidence' 'prejudice to Respondents' 'browne V Dunn Issues' 'national Security Information Redactions']
['practice and Procedure' 'evidence'] ['leave to Issue Subpoena to Give Evidence' 'outlines of Evidence' 'prejudice to Respondents' 'browne V Dunn Issues' 'national Security Information Redactions']

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

Interlocutory Application for Leave to Issue a Subpoena to Give Evidence / Application During Trial After Evidence Called by the Respondents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant should be granted leave to issue a Subpoena to give evidence to Person 81 despite no outline of evidence having been served for Person 81.' "Whether the respondents had sufficient notice of Person 81's anticipated evidence, including by reference to Sensitive IGADF Documents." 'Whether any prejudice to the respondents from calling Person 81 at this stage could be adequately addressed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was granted because Person 81's evidence may be relevant to an important issue, the catalyst for the application arose only during the respondents' evidence, there was no delay by the applicant, and the potential prejudice to the respondents could be managed by accommodating reasonable requests and applying principles concerning evidence not put to other witnesses.

Court Disposition

Application granted.

Orders

  • ['The applicant have leave to issue a Subpoena to give evidence to Person 81.']