Scanruby Pty Ltd v Caltex Petroleum Pty Ltd and Anor [2000] NSWIRComm 89

Scanruby Pty Ltd v Caltex Petroleum Pty Ltd and Anor [2000] NSWIRComm 89

The recorded conversations are admissible. Although secretly recorded, the recordings are excepted by s.5(3)(b)(i) of the Listening Devices Act 1984 as being reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of Scanruby/Mr Dimis. Further, s.13 of the Act does not apply to prevent a party to a conversation from giving evidence of it. The evidence was not improperly obtained for the purposes of s.138 of the Evidence Act 1995, so the balancing test does not arise. There is no oppression or undue prolixity in the material tendered.

Parties
Applicant (respondent on the Motion): Scanruby Pty Ltd; Respondent (applicant on the Motion): Caltex Petroleum Pty Ltd; Respondent: Caltex Australia Petroleum Pty Ltd
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Interlocutory Motion in Unfair Contract Proceedings / Interlocutory (evidentiary Admissibility)
Outcome
Motion dismissed with costs to the applicant as agreed or assessed.
Legal Topics
Unfair Contracts, Admissibility of Evidence, Listening Devices Act, Improperly Obtained Evidence
Industrial Law Evidence Law Unfair Contracts Admissibility of Evidence Listening Devices Act Improperly Obtained 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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Scanruby Pty Ltd

Applicant (respondent on the Motion)

Caltex Petroleum Pty Ltd

Respondent (applicant on the Motion)

Caltex Australia Petroleum Pty Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Interlocutory Motion in Unfair Contract Proceedings / Interlocutory (evidentiary Admissibility)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether secretly recorded conversations and video tapes are admissible
  2. 2 Whether recordings were obtained in contravention of the Listening Devices Act 1984 (NSW)
  3. 3 Whether s.13 of the Listening Devices Act 1984 renders the evidence inadmissible

Ratio Decidendi

The recorded conversations are admissible. Although secretly recorded, the recordings are excepted by s.5(3)(b)(i) of the Listening Devices Act 1984 as being reasonably necessary for the protection of the lawful interests of Scanruby/Mr Dimis. Further, s.13 of the Act does not apply to prevent a party to a conversation from giving evidence of it. The evidence was not improperly obtained for the purposes of s.138 of the Evidence Act 1995, so the balancing test does not arise. There is no oppression or undue prolixity in the material tendered.

Court Disposition

Motion dismissed with costs to the applicant as agreed or assessed.

Orders

  • Motion to exclude the evidence dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the applicant.