Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd v Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd (No 2) [2006] FCA 364
The affidavit of Ms Shelton and associated survey evidence is admissible as it falls within the hearsay exception in s 72, the requirements of s 190(3) are satisfied, and its probative value is not clearly outweighed by any prejudice or confusion per s 135; non-compliance with Practice Note 11 does not render it inadmissible.
- Parties
- Applicant: Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd; Respondent: Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 31 March 2006
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Proceeding / Admissibility Ruling on Evidence
- Outcome
- evidence admitted
- Legal Topics
- Survey Evidence, Hearsay Rule, Admissibility of Evidence, Trade Practices Act, Passing Off
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Cadbury Schweppes Pty Ltd
Applicant
Darrell Lea Chocolate Shops Pty Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Proceeding / Admissibility Ruling on Evidence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether survey evidence is admissible under the hearsay rule and relevant exceptions
- 2 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to exclude the survey evidence under s 135 of the Evidence Act
- 3 Whether non-compliance with Practice Note 11 affects admissibility
Ratio Decidendi
The affidavit of Ms Shelton and associated survey evidence is admissible as it falls within the hearsay exception in s 72, the requirements of s 190(3) are satisfied, and its probative value is not clearly outweighed by any prejudice or confusion per s 135; non-compliance with Practice Note 11 does not render it inadmissible.
Court Disposition
evidence admitted
Orders
- The affidavit of Caroline Judy Shelton and exhibits thereto will be admitted into evidence.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment